School Threatens to Ruin Valedictorian’s Naval Academy Appt.

[bripat9643]

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.

The boy wasn't in the military, so Patton's example is completely irrelevant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

 

[Unkotare]

School Threatens to Ruin Valedictorian’s Naval Academy Appt.

A Texas high school principal threatened to sabotage a valedictorian’s appointment to the U.S. Naval Academy after the student delivered a speech that referenced God and the U.S. Constitution, the boy’s attorney alleges.

Hiram Sasser, director of litigation with the Liberty Institute, said Joshua High School principal Mick Cochran threatened to write a letter to the U.S. Naval Academy disparaging the character of Remington Reimer.

“It was intimidating having my high school principal threaten my future because I wanted to stand up for the Constitution and acknowledge my faith and not simply read a government approved speech, the teenager said.

--

“Specifically, he threatened to send a letter to the United States Naval Academy advising them that Remington has poor character or words to that effect,” Sasser told Fox News.

After consulting with a school attorney, the principal temporarily retracted the threat, Sasser said.

“The principal said he wanted to try to ruin him for what he did – for talking about the Constitution and his faith,” Sasser said. “I don’t know if he’s going to be able to continue to be the principal of that school.”​

Principal Little Bitch is a prick.

What the fuck is going haywire in our society that we are producing douchebags like that at all, let alone providing them a pathway to positions of authority? Natural selection really seems to be dropping the ball lately.

 

[bripat9643]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

 

[bodecea]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

So...tell us what law prevents the principal from notifying the Naval Academy of what the boy did?

 

[Kondor3]

So, have we confirmed yet, the boy's (and his lawyer's) assertions that the school principal threatened to write to the US Naval Academy in order to...

1. punish the student in any way open to the principal?

2. ruin the student over the incident?

Has the principal's story or a sanitized district-sponsored version of the story surfaced yet?

I'm guessing, no.

The boy is obviously of sufficient good character so as to be accorded Letters of Recommendation from a variety of sources within his community, which is looked-at as part of the vetting process.

he boy is obviously of sufficient good character so as to have met the screening criteria for community involvement and leadership, which is looked-at as part of the vetting process.

The boy is obviously of sufficient good character so as to pass muster in the separate screenings or background checks provided by (1) the Congressional Representative who agreed to nominate him and (2) the one undertaken by the Department of Defense in order to approve his nomination to the US Naval Academy.

The boy took a courageous stand in the face of what he believed to be a Wrong Thing, which tells me that the kid actually "owns a pair" and is willing to take a stand and be counted.

He may or may not have been correct in his decision to deviate from the pre-approved and heavily edited script, but the Punishment threatened by the principal...

1. punishing him any way he could

2. ruining him for what he did

...is rather like swatting a mosquito with a cruise missile.

Overkill in the extreme... and failing to take into account the Principled Stand being made.

Picking on a wet-nosed, wet-behind-the-ears puppy like that...

I'll bet that principal runs-over squirrels and pulls the wings off flies and burns ants with a magnifying glass, too...

The principal should be ashamed of him-or-herself, for such petty, spiteful vengeful, juvenile and malevolent action directed against someone in their care...

Here's to proving that the principal did just what he-or-she is being accused of, and a sustained campaign of outrage on the part of the community, until the school district has no choice but to terminate this malignant intellectual dwarf who so threatened a young person.

 

[Kondor3]

"...So...tell us what law prevents the principal from notifying the Naval Academy of what the boy did?"

In all likelihood, no LEGAL barrier exists.

But, just because we CAN do a thing does not mean that we SHOULD do a thing.

Ethics - in the context of an experienced adult administrator who should have known better - as, indeed, 'most anyone with a heart - experienced or not - would have concluded.

The principal's threatening to 'punish him in any way he could' and 'ruin him for what he did' is absolutely inexcusable and indefensible, if it is proven to be true.

Grotesque and inappropriate behavior on the part of the principal, from an Ethical perspective - the use of power to inflict harm on a young person due to a desire for vengeance and punishment over a lightweight administrative matter - fukking disgusting.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

I am supporting the rule of law, you the rule of man, and your way is the way to tyranny.

The boy will not make it in a military academy if he can't submit to the good order and discipline of the corps.

 

[bripat9643]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

So...tell us what law prevents the principal from notifying the Naval Academy of what the boy did?

Getting sued for slander and defamation of character is what prevents him - also a hoard of angry parents who will run him out of town on a rail if decides to do that.

 

[bripat9643]

The comparison is apt because you have not built a case other than "free speech" which means nothing until you put it into context.

The Patton case is very good because the boy wants to go to a military academy,

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

I am supporting the rule of law, you the rule of man, and your way is the way to tyranny.

The boy will not make it in a military academy if he can't submit to the good order and discipline of the corps.

You don't even know what the rule of law is. Here's a clue: kissing the asses of government flunkies and getting used to the taste of boot polish is not what the rule of law is about. Every flunky at a Nazi death camp believed in following orders, just like you do, Fakey. Blind obedience is not what the rule of law is about.

The boy is going to the naval Academy. The principle faces the end of his career if he attempts to interfere.

 

[JakeStarkey]

It's irrelevant because he was in high school. He wasn't in the military or in a military academy. He's not bound by any military laws or codes of honor until he actually is in the military or in a military academy.

Once again, you're licking the boots of government functionaries rather than being concerned about the rights of a citizen.

You're a fucking Nazi, Fakey.

I am supporting the rule of law, you the rule of man, and your way is the way to tyranny.

The boy will not make it in a military academy if he can't submit to the good order and discipline of the corps.

You don't even know what the rule of law is. Here's a clue: kissing the asses of government flunkies and getting used to the taste of boot polish is not what the rule of law is about. Every flunky at a Nazi death camp believed in following orders, just like you do, Fakey. Blind obedience is not what the rule of law is about.

The boy is going to the naval Academy. The principle faces the end of his career if he attempts to interfere.

You, neo-anarchist, telling us what is the law? Really?? And following orders in America is not any equivalent of your false comparison to the Nazis.

He will not make it in the Naval Academy if he does not change his way of thinking.

The principal and the school district have decided on the strategy of counter-suing the parents and their supporters for infringement of the principal comply with legitimate rules and regulations.

And by the way: four prominent citizens of the community have written to the Academy's acceptance commission to give their considerations of the boy's suitability to be a naval cadet.

 

[bripat9643]

I am supporting the rule of law, you the rule of man, and your way is the way to tyranny.

The boy will not make it in a military academy if he can't submit to the good order and discipline of the corps.

You don't even know what the rule of law is. Here's a clue: kissing the asses of government flunkies and getting used to the taste of boot polish is not what the rule of law is about. Every flunky at a Nazi death camp believed in following orders, just like you do, Fakey. Blind obedience is not what the rule of law is about.

The boy is going to the naval Academy. The principle faces the end of his career if he attempts to interfere.

You, neo-anarchist, telling us what is the law? Really?? And following orders in America is not any equivalent of your false comparison to the Nazis.

It's not a false comparison. The mentality is identical.

He will not make it in the Naval Academy if he does not change his way of thinking.

The principal and the school district have decided on the strategy of counter-suing the parents and their supporters for infringement of the principal comply with legitimate rules and regulations.

And by the way: four prominent citizens of the community have written to the Academy's acceptance commission to give their considerations of the boy's suitability to be a naval cadet.

All that proves is that there is no shortage of Nazi boot lickers who think just like you.

Counter suing is a typical strategy when you're being sued. However, parents have every right to sue the principle. His suit is utterly groundless. Being sued is no basis for a lawsuit. The principle's suit will get tossed out. Then he will have to pay millions in damages if the boy doesn't get into the Naval academy. The other boot lickers will probably also be paying damages.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your mentality, bripat, is fascistic, because you believe in the law of the leader, which is you.

The parents' lawsuit will be thrown out. Then they will have to pay quite a bit off money.

And they kid is not going to the academy. That's a done deal.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

Let's hope the kid overcomes mindless nutball support like the op, keeps his head and his principled stand - something entirely foreign to the nutball scum of the earth - jumpstarts something good among young folks, like thoughtful civil disobedience.

I doubt the service academies encourage "thoughtful civil disobedience" as a desirable personality characteristic of military officers. In the armed services, constitutional considerations pretty much cease after the "lawful order" unit of instruction.

Is the kid a military officer? The kid is bright and willing to take well considered risks. That is what the kid is.

Military academies are not looking for halfwit white trash zombies. What military academies seek are highly intelligent individuals (valedictorians will do) with the courage to LEAD; the emotional maturity to make competent decisions under pressure and then execute them. Sometimes that means telling a senior officer no. Sometimes it means ordering men to follow toward eternity.

Bottom line: the kid is EXACTLY what academies are looking for- intelligent, well considered and courageous.

NOTE: Bodestinkfishtail negged my post above. That is because in addition to having the emotional development of a schoolyard bully, the poor tubby soul has less idea what the military is about than monkeys have about Shakespeare. I can quit swearing, for example, but she can't stop being a tubby lout.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Let's hope the kid overcomes mindless nutball support like the op, keeps his head and his principled stand - something entirely foreign to the nutball scum of the earth - jumpstarts something good among young folks, like thoughtful civil disobedience.

I doubt the service academies encourage "thoughtful civil disobedience" as a desirable personality characteristic of military officers. In the armed services, constitutional considerations pretty much cease after the "lawful order" unit of instruction.

Is the kid a military officer? The kid is bright and willing to take well considered risks. That is what the kid is.

Military academies are not looking for halfwit white trash zombies. What military academies seek are highly intelligent individuals (valedictorians will do) with the courage to LEAD; the emotional maturity to make competent decisions under pressure and then execute them. Sometimes that means telling a senior officer no. Sometimes it means ordering men to follow toward eternity.

Bottom line: the kid is EXACTLY what academies are looking for- intelligent, well considered and courageous.

You truly have no idea of what you are saying.

You are clueless.

Cadet have to learn how to follow spotlessly in order to lead.

The academies are not looking and will not accept applicants well grounded in civil disobedience.

The kid shot his own application dead with his behavior. He won't be going to Annapolis.

 

[Dugdale_Jukes]

I doubt the service academies encourage "thoughtful civil disobedience" as a desirable personality characteristic of military officers. In the armed services, constitutional considerations pretty much cease after the "lawful order" unit of instruction.

Is the kid a military officer? The kid is bright and willing to take well considered risks. That is what the kid is.

Military academies are not looking for halfwit white trash zombies. What military academies seek are highly intelligent individuals (valedictorians will do) with the courage to LEAD; the emotional maturity to make competent decisions under pressure and then execute them. Sometimes that means telling a senior officer no. Sometimes it means ordering men to follow toward eternity.

Bottom line: the kid is EXACTLY what academies are looking for- intelligent, well considered and courageous.

You truly have no idea of what you are saying.

You are clueless.

Cadet have to learn how to follow spotlessly in order to lead.

The academies are not looking and will not accept applicants well grounded in civil disobedience.

The kid shot his own application dead with his behavior. He won't be going to Annapolis.

No.
"Cadet" don't.
"Cadet" need to learn how to manage moral dilemmas within a rigorous system. Sometimes that means well considered challenges to orthodox thinking. That is what "Cadet" need to do.

What wannabes and remf clerks think about the forward echelon military never ceases to amuse me.

And even you aren't stupid enough to believe the kid is a civil disobedience pro.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

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.

That's the thing: they take everything at face value. They have no critical thinking skills. And it's always the ones who denigrate the education system who do this: those who believe their teachers had nothing to teach them and who resisted learning. Now they are nimnos with no ability to do any critical thinking, and they accept whatever they are told at face value, as long as it is told to them by people they choose to believe. Pathetic.

Is there some reason I shouldn't accept the student's story as confirmed by the district and his lawyer?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Naval Academy huh?

Where you are supposed to follow instructions without question? And he can't even deliver the valedictorian speech he agreed to give?

Not Naval Academy material

Yep. Not to mention lawyering up because someone is going to give you a bad review. So many entitlement junkies in this country.

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 is between him and his employer. The district told him not to write, it wasn't me.

 

[Jarlaxle]

There is more to the story than that, I suspect. The kid may be a foursquare prick and of poor character as alleged. However, if the OP is absolutely correct in its general charge, then the principal needs to resign.

Do you know how hard it is to get into any of the academies? What makes you think anyone could get through that process if the have poor character?

It has happened...this is not debatable.

 

[Jarlaxle]

Oh goody, more imaginary persecution


Read more: Texas high school valedictorian cut off after mentioning 'God' in graduation speech - NY Daily News

Naturally, you would believe everything the school says.

Do you have any evidence the school is ‘lying.’

Otherwise, the school was well within its rights to end the speech. The student should have delivered the speech he agreed to deliver, and was compelled to have the approval of the school regarding any changes.

Forget the speech. The principal tried to ruin the dude's future!