School Threatens to Ruin Valedictorian’s Naval Academy Appt.

[Katzndogz]

We're moving toward a point where the principal could just write a letter saying that the boy is a Christian and that would be enough to ruin him. Like the way the public is being nudged into voting against men and women who are Christians.

 

[JakeStarkey]

We're moving toward a point where the principal could just write a letter saying that the boy is a Christian and that would be enough to ruin him.

No, we are not, loony one.

 

[bripat9643]

I love all the posters protesting how the boys Constitutional right to free speech is being violated, yet the principal doesn't have a right to free speech to contact the Naval Academy?

That's called slander and defamation of character. I'd sue his ass myself.

How unsurprising that you support the ability of some boot-licking government toady to destroy the future of someone in his charge.

Do you even read what you post?

Slander? To prove slander you have to prove that what was said was not true
Defamation of Character? He is merely reporting on the character of the boy

A jury will decide that if intends to proceed.

 

[bripat9643]

It's interesting to note how all the so-called "liberals" are supporting the ability of a government functionary to destroy the promising future of someone in his charge simply because he decided to speak his mind.

These are the people who claim to believe in freedom. What they really believe in is government.

I've never seen such abject servility in my life.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is not a free speech issue at all. This was a government function with certain guidelines. The boy promised to follow them, lied through his teeth, and tried to turn his lie into action. He failed.

 

[Katzndogz]

The boy believes the Constitution should be upheld. If that doesn't get him thrown out of the military what chance does the left have!

 

[bripat9643]

This is not a free speech issue at all. This was a government function with certain guidelines. The boy promised to follow them, lied through his teeth, and tried to turn his lie into action. He failed.

The boy never "agreed" to jack squat. He was told what he could say otherwise be the target of an ultimatum. The "he agreed to it" meme is total horseshit.

 

[JakeStarkey]

This is not a free speech issue at all. This was a government function with certain guidelines. The boy promised to follow them, lied through his teeth, and tried to turn his lie into action. He failed.

The boy never "agreed" to jack squat. He was told what he could say otherwise be the target of an ultimatum. The "he agreed to it" meme is total horseshit.

You want to prove that opinionated statement? Read above, and you will find that you are in error.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Freedom of speech

I agree! The principal has the freedom of speech to tell the Naval Academy his opinion!

 

[TemplarKormac]

Freedom of speech

I agree! The principal has the freedom of speech to tell the Naval Academy his opinion!

Huh? Stop trolling.

 

[TemplarKormac]

This is not a free speech issue at all. This was a government function with certain guidelines. The boy promised to follow them, lied through his teeth, and tried to turn his lie into action. He failed.

The boy never "agreed" to jack squat. He was told what he could say otherwise be the target of an ultimatum. The "he agreed to it" meme is total horseshit.

You want to prove that opinionated statement? Read above, and you will find that you are in error.

You never proved he did, so why don't you substantiate your claim first?

 

[bripat9643]

This is not a free speech issue at all. This was a government function with certain guidelines. The boy promised to follow them, lied through his teeth, and tried to turn his lie into action. He failed.

The boy never "agreed" to jack squat. He was told what he could say otherwise be the target of an ultimatum. The "he agreed to it" meme is total horseshit.

You want to prove that opinionated statement? Read above, and you will find that you are in error.

Where is the evidence that the boy "agreed" to anything? The principle even admits the boy was told that if he deviated from the approved text his mic would be cutoff. How does that constitute "consent?" Complying with ultimatums is not consent.

 

[TemplarKormac]

And as usual, Jake ignores my request.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Freedom of speech

I agree! The principal has the freedom of speech to tell the Naval Academy his opinion!

Huh? Stop trolling.

Freedom of speech - have you heard of it?

 

[bripat9643]

I agree! The principal has the freedom of speech to tell the Naval Academy his opinion!

Huh? Stop trolling.

Freedom of speech - have you heard of it?

Have you ever heard of slander and defamation of character?

 

[Gracie]

The principle even admits the boy was told that if he deviated from the approved text his mic would be cutoff.

Yeah, but the principle forgot to warn the kid that he himself would see to it that the naval academy got a bad report. Oh. Wait. The principle left that part out? Why, of course he did, because he KNOWS what would happen...and did happen.

So, is the principle still there as principle? I hope he is fired promptly.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The principle should be thrown out of education permanently from what the story says. In my opinion he should be prosecuted for official oppression.

So...you take this on face value automatically.

You take everything the Administration says no matter how often disproved on face value.

 

[Ravi]

It's interesting to note how all the so-called "liberals" are supporting the ability of a government functionary to destroy the promising future of someone in his charge simply because he decided to speak his mind.

These are the people who claim to believe in freedom. What they really believe in is government.

I've never seen such abject servility in my life.

It's difficult to believe the kids version of events since he's already shown he isn't dependable.

 

[oldfart]

I've seen more than one cadet wash out of service academies because they didn't understand chain of command when they went in. I would have respected him more if he refused to submit the speech. But if he led the school official to believe that he was giving a "compliant" speech and did not, that is an honor code violation if done at a service academy.

If he had expressed himself properly, the school would be able to disqualify him as valedictorian (it a bestowed honor, not a "right") or to choose another student to give the speech. I've also seen this happen when a student insisted on making editorial comments about school policy or political matters that the school deemed inappropriate. After all, this ceremony belongs to the school, not one student.

What the fuck is wrong with everyone who is defending the principal here? They knew he wasn't planning to follow the speech, he made that clear in advance, which is why they were ready to cut his mike, and why he didn't even finish the sentence before they did.

So your position is that the school should have punished him before he had the opportunity to obey the principal's instructions?

By the way, the graduation is for the students, not the school. The school will still be there next year.

Students plural. I am unaware that they were consulted.

As a side note, valedictorian is traditionally given to the student with the highest GPA of the graduating class.

Yes, and just as traditionally school administrations censor their speeches.

This is not even close. Gen Patton had to beg and give assurances to Ike to avoid being sent home when he made some ill-advised remarks in public. Are you honestly suggesting that had the student done this at a military academy he would not be immediately discharged?

And where on earth did anyone come up with the idea that First Amendment rights trump established policy for military officers? If you want to criticize the Commander in Chief or the upper command you do it after resigning.

 

[bripat9643]

It's interesting to note how all the so-called "liberals" are supporting the ability of a government functionary to destroy the promising future of someone in his charge simply because he decided to speak his mind.

These are the people who claim to believe in freedom. What they really believe in is government.

I've never seen such abject servility in my life.

It's difficult to believe the kids version of events since he's already shown he isn't dependable.

How has he shown that, by not complying with Stalinist ultimatums?