CRT and Dr. Ben Carson

Read this Opinion on FoxNews.com by Dr. Ben Carson and Critical Race Theory (CRT).

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/fighting-critical-race-theory-racist-ideology-dr-ben-carson

This is one of the best lines: "To start, it’s important to understand that the term "antiracism" as used by (Ibram) Kendi, which sounds non-threatening enough, does not mean what you think."

You do know who Dr. Carson is; right? He's a "real" doctor. As in M.D. A retired neurosurgeon. 

If you haven't already uncovered the truth about CRT, don't wait any longer. Stand up now and speak to the Richland 2 School Board. Demand that it stop the division that CRT drives.

Amelia McKie now Owes Ethics Commission $57,100

The South Carolina Ethics Commission published an updated list of Debtors on July 6, 2021. You can view this list by going to ethics.sc.gov and clicking on "Debtors" at the top right of the homepage.

Not-quite board member, and newly-elected* Secretary of the Board, Amelia McKie, now owes a total of $57,100 to the Ethics Commission.

Her previous balance was $51.800. Where did the $5,300 increase come from?

In the Remarks column for her entry, the Ethics Commission notes Default Years of 2016, 2020 and 2021. This means that something happened this year - 2021 - that resulted in additional fines of $5,300. This sum increased her total debt from $51,800 to $57,100.

An inquiry for public information is being registered today with the Ethics Commission.

McKie was re-elected to the school board in November 2018. What's that old Beatles' song? "With a little help from my friends"? Well, with a lot of help from her friends. I think she bragged at one time about 26,000 of her "friends" (voters).

What kind of friends support a person who doesn't pay her debts?

On July 10, 2019 the Ethics Commission filed a judgment against McKie for $51,750 in the Richland County Common Pleas Court. That followed a Decision & Order by the Ethics Commission in 2018. At my last inquiry to the Ethics Commission earlier this year, McKie HAD NOT PAID ONE PENNY TOWARD THAT JUDGMENT. 

https://publicindex.sccourts.org/Richland/PublicIndex/CaseDetails.aspx?County=40&CourtAgency=40002&Casenum=2019CP4003809&CaseType=V&HKey=541168010675685611685110113658311380801101004872681051116512068574910051998499521074786795410410182111

McKie was fined another $50 for late filing of a required form. And now the Ethics Commission has slammed her with a new $5,300!

* On June 29, 2021 the school board disregarded a plea from one District resident (me) for them to elect only fully-qualified board members as officers for 2021-2022. In a 4-3 vote McKie was elected as Board Secretary. Holmes was elected Board Chair in a 5-2 vote. Neither Holmes nor McKie was entitled to vote, because neither is a legitimate board member!

The board had definitely left its thinking caps at home that night. McKie (and Teresa Holmes) never should have been elected as officers for the new school year, because neither is a legitimate board member. Neither has ever taken the oath of office legally. James Manning never should have nominated Holmes.

Why is this not important to Mannng, Caution-Parker and McFadden? I strongly suspect it is important to Agostini and Scott (Elkins).

Four of the five legal board members could put a stop to the usurping of public office by Holmes and McKie. Why don't they?

School Board Member Violates Ethics Law

The State newspaper reports today that Lexington-Richland 5 school board chair Jan Hammond violated South Carolina ethics laws by using the District's email system for political purposes. Read the article here:  www.thestate.com/news/local/education/article252606943.html

Are ethics laws to be dismissed? Can a board member just violate them and say, So what? Or say they don't agree?

Have you ever received a political email from the Richland 2 board member, sent from a Richland 2 email address? If you have, please send it me at gusphilpott@gmail.com 

Hopefully, someone in L-R5 has filed a formal complaint with the S.C. Ethics Commission. That will trigger and investigate, hearing, decision and fine. As well it should.

But a boy is a girl...

Is this nonsense headed for Richland 2 School District?

Read this article about an abrupt ending to a school board meeting in Loudoun County, Va., when the school board got fed up with parents and walked out. Note: it's the school board that walked out of the meeting!!!

Click here for the article in The Heritage Foundation's Daily Signal bulletin.

The question here in Richland 2 School District is "to what extent is this gender nonsense about to be implemented in the District?"

If staff think that recipients can't figure out their gender from their first names, is that thought contagious?

Now, if you have a first name that cannot be easily intetpreted for the correct gender, then put (Ms.) or (Mr.) in front of the typed name in the signature block. For example, I didn't know that Ishmael (now Tate) was a woman in the HR department, and I did not know the correct salutation in written correspondence. This is easily corrected by showing her name in the signature block as (Ms.) Ishmael Tate. There is absolutely no need to go woke with "Preferred pronouns she/her". 

Some in the District's administration are now using "preferred pronouns" in their signature lines in email. Why? Is this a signal to residents, parents, voters?

Unfortunately, the make-up of the Richland 2 School Board and its leadership now will probably result in more woke-ness. 

Parents, show up at school board meetings and demand a return to sanity. And don't be silenced when the Chair grabs her gavel and tries to hammer you into silence. If you are speaking and not violating the written policy by using "gossip, defamatory words, or abusive or vulgar language" (Board Policy BEDH), then don't be silenced. If you want to mention a school board member by position or name, do it. They are public, elected officials, not hired employees of the District. If a board member, even an officer of the board, is violating the law or public policy, there is no reason not to be able to hold them accountable.

Now, when the Chair orders a school district security officer or deputy sheriff to remove you from the podium, go peacefully. Do not get into a tussle with either. And then hire a lawyer and sue the District for violating your First Amendment rights to free speech. You know, the part about how "government" (that includes a school district) is not to infringe on that right?

When Does Voter Fraud Occur?

When does Voter Fraud occur in an election? Coming off the November 2020 Federal election, all should be aware of voter fraud. Right? On June 29, 2021, the Richland 2 Board of Trustees held an election for its officers for the School Year 2021-2022.

Does voting fraud occur -

when a person who is not eligible to run for office is nominated?

when the ineligible person fails to decline the nomination?

when the person conducting the election allows the nomination of an ineligible person? 

when no elected member of the public body objects to the nomination of an ineligible person?

when the person conducting the election fails to ask the nominee if s/he accepts thenomination?

when persons cast votes for an ineligible person?

when persons who are not eligible to vote, do vote?

when the person conducting the election allows persons who are not eligible voters to cast ballots?

when the person counts the votes in a way that is confusing to the public?

when only one person counts the votes cast in a secret voting process?

when the votes are counted by the person conducting the election, particularly when he has a vested interest in the outcome?

when the person conducting the voting asks if he has received all the ballots; after all, he is holding all that he has received. How would anyone else know? The proper question is, have all ballots been cast? If there are seven voters and he is holding seven ballots, he should just so state.

Who or what agency should investigate this type of "voter fraud"?

Public Participation - June 29, 2021

Be sure to watch the public participation portion of the June 29, 2021 school board meeting. It is found at www.richland2.org/livestream. Look for the date of the meeting and be sure to click the Play arrow. Then fast-forward (drag the counter) to 13:48.

Several parents presented very forceful remarks against the teaching of "anti-racism" and of gender. It is the parents' role to teach their children about gender.

Two pointed out that "anti-racism' is a higher priority for Richland 2 than discipline. One man said that anti-racism is nothing more than bait-and-switch. Bravo!

Watch and listen carefully to the remarks of these parents.Start showing up at board meetings and speak out. If you don't, then the board will go right on its merry way and pursue the path it is on. It is up to the board to direct and guide the superintendent and the staff on the path ordered by those who have elected them.

When enough parents show up and speak out, the board will begin to get the message. 

A good example to follow is that of the parents in Loudoun County, Virginia. They are loud and they are in the news. That should be happening here.

Awaiting FOIA Request re oath by McKie, Holmes

After Tuesday night's board meeting I submitted a new FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request to Richland 2 for copies of the most-recent oath of office taken by Teresa Holmes and Amelia McKie.

Previously, the District provided me with copies of the oath of office administered on November 13, 2018.

Have they ever taken the oath of office after December 4, 2018? 

More than once, I requested the District to inform me of any administration of the oath after December 4, 2018 to McKie and Holmes, and I have never been so informed.

There are several problems with the oath that was administered on November 13, 2018.

McKie and Holmes were not eligible to take the oath on November 13, 2018. Neither had filed her Statement of Economic Interests Report (SEI) with the South Carolina Ethics Commission. That SEI must be filed before a newly-elected (or re-elected) person can take the oath and assume the duties of the office.

They repeated the words of the oath on November 13, 2018, but those words had, and have, no legal effect. The Oath form was notarized, and it is meaningless - legally. Presumably, it was submitted to the State of South Carolina, as required. Again, all meaningless.

Another reason the oath on November 13, 2018 is meaningless is that the November 6, 2018 election of McKie and Holmes had not yet been certified by the Richland County Board of Elections. That  certification happened on November 9, 2018. The earliest that McKie and Holmes could have legally taken the oath (if they had already filed their SEIs (which they hadn't)) was November 16, 2018.

The District had been swearing in new trustees improperly (early, before the election was certified) for about ten years. They'd still be doing so, if I hadn't called their attention to the law.

Why is this a big deal?

It was bad enough that McKie and Holmes were allowed to sit at the board and participate in board decisions by voting. And drawing a Trustee's salary and benefits.

But now Holmes and McKie are officers of the board.

If you aren't a legal board member, you can't be a legal board officer. 

If they haven't taken the oath of office since December 4, 2018, they should be removed. All monies paid to or for them should be recovered by the District. All board decisions swayed by their votes should be reviewed and changed to include only votes by legal board members.

I'll let you know how the District responds to my FOIA Request.