170 votes

Update: High School AP History Book Rewrites 2nd Amendment

Photo by Sean Getts

It is our duty to stop stuff like this.

Guyer High School (and obviously several others) are complicit in attempting to condition students to interpret the 2nd Amendment in a clearly opposite manner in which it was intended. The 1st, 3rd, 4th, and 5th are also misinterpreted as several commenters below pointed out.

This textbook, currently being used by Guyer High School, is attempting to redefine the Second Amendment to impressionable young minds. Parents, you must speak up and demand action. Investigate your child's history book ASAP, and post more pictures in the comments below. Call your school and demand that revisionist history books like this are removed from the school district.

Textbook version: "The people have a right to keep and bear arms in a state militia."

Actual 2nd Amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Did you catch the sleight of hand?

A militia is a body of citizens enrolled for military service, and called out periodically for drill but serving full time only in emergencies. It's a common man army of citizens, NOT soldiers. The citizens are called up in emergencies to protect the free State.

The 2nd Amendment says that a militia is necessary to protect a free State, so in order to be able to have a militia, the citizens have a natural right to keep and bear arms and the government cannot infringe on that right.

The textbook version implies that we're only allowed to keep and bear arms if we're in a State militia, a clear misrepresentation of the 2nd Amendment.

Your Call to Action:

1. Call Guyer High School and tell the appropriate person something like the following:

"Hello, my name is _______________. I saw that your AP History course has issued a book titled, United States History: Preparing for the Advanced Placement Examination. In this book, on page 102, the definition provided for the Second Amendment is incorrect and seems to be suggesting that only members of a State Militia are allowed to keep and bear arms. Who made the decision to use this text book? I'd like them to issue a public statement on this book's attempt to redefine the 2nd Amendment and why they chose to use it. We would also like this issue to be discussed at the next school board meeting. Please include it on the official agenda."

John H. Guyer High School
7501 Teasley Lane
Denton, TX 76210
P: 940-369-1000

2. If you live in the area or if you child attends this school, organize with your neighbors and storm the next school board meeting to demand answers.

School Board Meeting

Tuesday, September 24, 2013 6:00 PM

The Denton ISD Board of Trustees will be meeting at 6 p.m. Tuesday, Sept. 24, in the Board Room at the Dennis Stephens Central Services Building. For more information please contact Kim Stevenson, administrative assistant to the superintedent, at (940) 369-0002.

3. Inspect your child's history book and photograph other instances of intentional misrepresentations. Post pictures and blog about these occurrences. Demand your school districts regain control of their curriculum.

4. Share this story with your friends, family, and media connections to raise awareness.

UPDATE:

Just got off the phone with Kim Stevenson, Admin to the Superintendent.

1. Board members will not address any speaking on an item that is not part of the official agenda.

2. A community member could not add an item to the agenda.

3. You must sign in at Kim's desk in order to speak. You can speak up to 2 times and for 3 minutes. If a large number of us are attending we can assign a person to be our spokesperson and they may possibly give that person extra time.

The state adopts the textbooks every couple of years. She advised that besides attending next week's board meeting that we also speak with Darrell Muncy, Director of Student Services or speak with someone in the curriculum department.

UPDATE from Sean Getts, the father who took the picture:

"I had no idea that a pic I posted on FB would spread like wildfire. 99.99999999% of the people probably don't even know that it was my 16 year old daughter that actually brought it to my attention. I certainly planned on taking action, but the attention its received nationally has been incredible."

___



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Thanks

for sticking with this story! (I almost said "sticking to this story", but I think that would have a different meaning.)

Defend Liberty!

I sent my son to a Baptist

I sent my son to a Baptist school named a Christian School (they knew the B word would scare folks off) For the most part he got a pretty decent education. His eigth grade biology book was almost comedic though. It made perfect well written studied sense but then all of the sudden everything it had just explained leading up to natural selection and evolution was suddenly all for nought as it less than eloquently stated but none of this ever happened and the world wasn't that old. It was laughable. It was also when I realized I needed to teach him to question, fact check, and look elsewhere.

In retrospect, it was probably a well written postulation by a christian academic but suffered from some rudimentery editing.

Person who took photo says 16 year daughter found the error!

UPDATE from Sean Getts, the father who took the picture:

"I had no idea that a pic I posted on FB would spread like wildfire. 99.99999999% of the people probably don't even know that it was my 16 year old daughter that actually brought it to my attention. I certainly planned on taking action, but the attention its received nationally has been incredible."

I'm a serial entrepreneur and liberty activist from Texas!

www.RevolutionCarBadges.com
www.NonNetwork.com

Another attack on the children by gov't

Indoctrinating children against the Constitution, yet another violation of our rights. The gov’t constantly violates our rights.

They violate the 1st Amendment by caging protesters and banning books like "America Deceived II".

They violate the 4th and 5th Amendment by allowing TSA to grope you.

They violate the entire Constitution by starting undeclared wars.

Impeach Obama.

Last link of "America Deceived II" before it is completely banned:

http://www.amazon.com/America-Deceived-II-Possession-interro...

From a 1950 textbook

I have a copy of a 1950 textbook explaining the Constitution called "Your Rugged Constitution." It is quite unique because it even shows the past language that was struck when some were amended for change. Here's how it explains the second amendment:

AMENDMENT 2

"A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

Overview:
A large national army can become a threat to a free people, for it's leaders may seize the government and deprive the people of their rights. Fearing such an army, early citizens of the United States chose to place their security very largely in the hands of state militia, or citizen armies. This amendment was added to keep the federal government from passing any rules that would interfere with lawful possession and use of arms by the people.

Their summary:

YOU DENY: To the federal government the power to interfere with your ownership and use of weapons for lawful purposes.

YOU GET: Protection against abuse of power by a national army.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

Thirteen Words

Probably the most misunderstood while also the most vital 13 Words of the U.S. Constitution, "A well-regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State..." What did the Founders mean by "well regulated"? They meant "well organized" and that had been done, year after year in all of the 13 Colonies, by Colonial statues(regulation),then State statues(regulation)since the early 1600's. What was the "Militia"? All able bodied free men,with a few exceptions, between 16-60 years old. This is what was understood by all Americans at the time. For more info, see http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_ss_i_1_14?url=search-alias... For nearly 300 years in America we had a very "well organized "Colonial and then State Militia structure, made up of most able bodied citizens. Then in 1903 our brilliant congress, did just the opposite of what WE THE PEOPLE delegated to them to do in Article I sec.8 cl.16 "To provide for organizing... the Militia" They UNorganized the vast majority of the PEOPLE that make up the "Militia" and Organized the "standing" ARMY'S National Guard and falsely claimed that this is now "Militia" http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311 This has never been repealed and is not the "Militia"or the "Militia of the several States" as referred to in Article II sec.2 of the Constitution. See also http://yourprecinctproject.com/

Very good information

Thank you, yes I steps that were taken in my States Constitution:

Az Constitution

Article 16 Militia

Sec 1. 1. Composition of militia

Section 1. The militia of the state of Arizona shall consist of all capable citizens of the state between the ages of eighteen and forty-five years, and of those between said ages who shall have declared their intention to become citizens of the United States, residing therein, subject to such exemptions as now exist, or as may hereafter be created, by the laws of the United States or of this state.

Sec 2. Composition and designation of organized militia
The organized militia shall be designated "The National Guard of Arizona," and shall consist of such organized military bodies as now exist under the laws of the territory of Arizona or as may hereafter be authorized by law.

Sec 3. Conformity to federal regulations
The organization, equipment, and discipline of the national guard shall conform as nearly as shall be practicable to the regulations for the government of the armies of the United States.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

The publisher

?

Published by...

Written by:
Bruce Allyn Findlay and Esther Blair Findlay
Illustrations by Richard Dawson
American ideals series Stanford University Press.

"How America's House of Freedom was built"

Stanford University Press, Stanford California
London: Geoffrey Cumberledge,Oxford University Press
Baker Baker and Taylor Company, 55 Fifth Avenue New York 3
Henry M. Snyder & Company,440 fourth Avenue, New York 16
W.S. Hall & Company,457 Madison Avenue, New York 22

Copyright 1950

By the Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University
Printed and bound in the United States by Stanford University Press.

Got to love it!

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

Thank you

.

You are absolutely welcome

.

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

If nothing else

I'd like to see this part of that textbook in our classrooms.

Just ask...

I would be honored share any of the others you would like!

If I disappear from a discussion please forgive me. My 24-7 business requires me to split mid-sentence to serve them. I am not ducking out, I will be back later to catch up.

wow

wow

______
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

Another one here

My daughter is in grade school. For Constitution day they learned a little about our founding document but of course I was skeptical. So she brings home the work sheet. On one page it claims the following "The Constitution tells us how OUR GOVERNMENT GIVES US SPECIAL RIGHTS and how our government works." (My emphasis)

As we all know, our rights are inalienable via our creator. I'd post a pic but can't, I'm on an IPAD.

______
"When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty."

not inalienable

"As we all know, our rights are inalienable via our creator". The actual wording is "unalienable". There is a fine line, but very important,between them.

What's the difference?

I'd never heard that before. It looks like some drafts of the Declaration used "inalienable" and some "unalienable". This page:
http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/unalienable.htm
(via google cache if that page is still down)
lists seven versions/drafts of the declaration, and which word was used.
Unalienable in:

The Declaration on parchment, now in the Department of State
The Declaration as written out in the corrected Journal
The Declaration as printed by Dunlap under the order of Congress
The copy in the handwriting of John Adams of the "Rough draught" of the Declaration, now at the Massachusetts Historical Society.

Inalienable in:

The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in The American Philosophical Society, in Philadelphia
The Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the New York Public Library
The draft of the Declaration in the handwriting of Jefferson now in the Massachusetts Historical Society, in Boston

So I'm curious what the difference is supposed to be, and what it would mean that Adams used one and Jefferson used the other. Sounds intriguing.

Could you please post a picture

when you get a chance or have the appropriate equipment / gadgetry handy? It would be much appreciated. The more of these things we can expose the better.

Thanks in advance! ; )

What would the Founders do?

I made that mistake

myself years ago, writing in some letter to the editor. I got a call from a Social Studies teacher (now long retired) who explained to me WHAT MAKES OUR CONSTITUTION UNIQUE - the fact that the gov't does not grant us our rights; rather, WE grant the gov't the power to PROTECT our rights:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed..." http://www.ushistory.org/declaration/document/

On top of how (really) shoddy teacher ed is these days, already more than a generation has been raised without fully appreciating what that means: IF the government gave us our rights, the government could take them away. The point is, with an elementary school teacher (vs. high school social studies teacher) I'd say it's more likely ignorance than intent to proselytize progressive propaganda. (I highly doubt that the teacher made up the worksheet.) The consequence is the same, though! That teacher needs to have it pointed out.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Michael Nystrom's picture

51K likes

I think that is a record Rob. Good work. Incredible.

Thank you for your efforts, in the cause of Liberty.

He's the man.

Ted Cruz

posted the blaze article on his Facebook page

https://twitter.com/#!/Agonzo1

College Bd is at the root of this travesty

From the AP U.S. History Teachers Guide Chapter 1: Overview "...We work to comprehend the effects of social and economic change on men, women, and children and to theorize about the complex processes involved when cultural and intellectual patterns begin to shift, when traditional political mores no longer hold." http://apcentral.collegeboard.com/apc/public/repository/ap-u...

Hmm. I wonder which "traditional political mores" they believe no longer hold.

Like they (progressives) say, you gotta work "bottom up and top down." Schools need to be contacted re the curriculum; AMSCO re the review books that correspond to the course & exam; and the College Board setting the overall agenda.

What I find particularly ironic is that the AP courses are all about "document based" essays: presenting students with primary sources. Yet as KEY as the Constitution is to our history and national identity, for THAT an opinionated paraphrased summary is deemed more appropriate. See "Writing Responses to a Document-Based Question." (Page 20) Ha, ha. They say, "Indeed, there is no better way to study the men and women of the American past than to listen to their own words." That is, I guess, except for American founders whose beliefs reflect "traditional political mores that no longer hold," as per (for one) the Constitution; there it's preferable for an entire generation of American youth to learn what the Constitution says from how Mssrs. John J. Newman and John M. Schmalbach have interpreted and/or adapted it.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Student Required Reading Should Include Federalist #46

Every time "MILITIA" is mentioned in a school text book, Federalist #46 should be included:

Which establishes that officers are to be chosen among those in each local CITIZEN militia (not government or military); Be as an "Opposing" Force to the US Military as well as that of foreign enemies; and at a Power Ratio of 25 equally armed Citizens to every 1 in the US Military. (i.e. 25 Citizen tanks to every 1 US Army Tank)

Here James Madison states it Clearly:

---

Federalist #46: James Madison - Complete Quote Text ( http://www.constitution.org/fed/federa46.htm ):

James Madison: "...The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterrupted succession of men ready to betray both;

that THE "TRAITORS" should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some "fixed plan" for the "extension" of the "military establishment";

that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and " continue to supply the materials", "until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads", must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger.

The highest number to which, according to the "best computation", a standing army can be carried in "ANY COUNTRY", "DOES NOT EXCEED" one hundredth (1/100th) part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth (1/25th) part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men.

"TO THESE" (The United States Military) WOULD BE "OPPOSED" (MEANING THE MILITIA IS TO BE AN OPPOSING FORCE TO THE US MILITARY) A (CITIZEN) "MILITIA" amounting to near half a million of "CITIZENS" with "ARMS IN THEIR HANDS",

OFFICERED BY MEN CHOSEN FROM "AMONG THEMSELVES" (CHOSEN BY THE LOCAL CITIZEN'S - NOT MILITARY OR FEDERAL GOVERNMENT), fighting for their (THE CITIZEN'S) common liberties, and united and conducted by government"S" (LOCAL) possessing their (THE CITIZEN MILITIA'S) affections and confidence.

It may well be doubted, whether a (CITIZEN) MILITIA "thus circumstanced" (25 to 1 ARMED POWER RATIO) could ever be conquered by such a (SMALL) proportion of "regular troops" (i.e. federal US ARMY, NAVY, AIR FORCE, MARINES).

Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it.

Besides the advantage of (THE CITIZENS) being armed, which the Americans (CITIZENS) possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of "subordinate governments", to which the people are attached, and by which the (CITIZEN) MILITIA officers are appointed (officered by men chosen among themselves), forms a barrier against the "enterprises of ambition", more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of.

Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes.

But were the people to "possess" the additional advantages of "LOCAL" governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the (CIVILIAN) militia, by these (LOCAL) governments, and attached both to them and to the (CITIZEN) MILITIA, it may be "affirmed with the greatest assurance", that the throne of "every tyranny in Europe" would be "speedily overturned" in spite of the legions which surround it.

Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in "ACTUAL POSSESSION", than the "debased subjects of arbitrary power" would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors.

Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the "long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it"."

---

APP: This should alarm any US Citizen, as our present condition of Citizens NOT armed with a 25 to 1 superiority over our own standing army;

and the fact that our "Citizen Militias" officered by men "chosen among themselves" do NOT exist in any number near this in military capability or armament, is CLEAR EVIDENCE that the "long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it" have "ALREADY OCCURRED".

These are important definitions to the meaning of the words, rights and general phrases to the Constitution. As well as, important limits to federal powers.

Also read the Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 for more on Citizen Militias and state powers that you may not know:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

And the need for localized republics and representation for adequate representation: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/

Educate Yourself. Educate Others.

American Patriot Party is now on Facebook:
https://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nat...

Remember to Hit the "Like" Our Page; and Share Article Links.

Daily Paul Link on Article: http://www.dailypaul.com/298835/james-madison-federalist-46-...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Federalist # 46 - Best reply!

In a recommended proportion between the two, the distinction between a citizen militia and "regular troops" is clear, as also the purpose: "It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops."

Thanks Richard.

When we try to pick out anything by itself, we find it hitched to everything else in the Universe.
~ John Muir

Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 Takes it Further...

The Ramifications of this Definition of Powers Goes Further.

When you understand the other limits set down upon the federal government by the Founders; and freedoms with regard to Citizen Militias (CITIZENS) "IMPORTING ARMS" themselves "WITHOUT RESTRICTION".

Marshall states clearly that state Citizen Militias (Citizens) can "IMPORT ARMS" "WITHOUT" federal legislative approval; as the federal government "CANNOT INTERPOSE"!

Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788 - In Full:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

---

John Marshall: "...Gentlemen have said that the states cannot defend themselves without an "application to Congress", because "Congress" can "interpose"!

Does not "EVERY MAN" feel a "REFUTATION" of the argument in his own breast?

I will SHOW {420} that there could "NOT" be a combination, between those (Founders) who formed the Constitution, to take away this power...." --

...If Congress neglect our militia (citizens), "WE (THE CITIZENS THEMSELVES) CAN ARM THEM (us) OURSELVES".

CANNOT Virginia "IMPORT ARMS? >>> CANNOT "SHE" (THE CITIZENS OF THE STATE) put them into the hands of "HER" (CITIZEN) MILITIA-MEN?..."

(i.e.: THEY / WE / THE CITIZENS THEMSELVES - "CAN" and with a 25 (Citizen) to 1 (Standing Army) - power ratio to oppose if necessary both foreign enemies or the standing US Military as James Madison clearly establishes as a REQUIREMENT in ANY COUNTRY - in Federalist #46)

---

The federal government presently using the Commerce clause to restrict or "interpose" any arm, is "CLEARLY OUTSIDE" the limited "delegated" powers.

Read more on how the other Founders such as John Marshall intended and understood in fact what those limits of the federal government were:

Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

Can anyone imagine

a student taking the advanced placement exam, knowing the truth, and getting a question on the 1st, 2nd, etc..amendment wrong because the book states the first amendment includes the theory of separation of church and state or the 2nd amendment applies only to state militias?

A student who knows the truth would fail this exam.

George Mason: The Militia is "ALL PEOPLE" - "Self Preservation"

Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/americanpatriotpartynewsl...

Mr. GEORGE MASON. "Mr. Chairman, a worthy member has asked WHO ARE THE MILITIA, if they be not "THE PEOPLE" "OF THIS COUNTRY", and if we are not to be PROTECTED FROM THE FATE of the Germans, Prussians, by OUR REPRESENTATION? I ask, WHO ARE THE MILITIA? They CONSIST NOW of the "WHOLE PEOPLE" (ALL CITIZENS ALL PEOPLE), except a few public officers...."

Self Preservation is called the "First Law of Nature":

Absolute Rights of the Colonists 1772:

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/Rights_of_the_Colonists/r...

Samuel Adams:

"1st. Natural Rights of the Colonists as Men.--

Among the Natural Rights of the Colonists are these First. a Right to Life; Secondly to Liberty; thirdly to Property; together with the Right to support and DEFEND THEM in the BEST MANNER THEY CAN (i.e. NO LIMITATIONS)--Those are EVIDENT Branches of, rather than deductions from the "DUTY OF SELF PRESERVATION", commonly called "THE FIRST LAW OF NATURE"--"...

Every "natural Right" not "expressly" given up or from the nature of a Social Compact "necessarily" ceded "REMAINS" (With "THE PEOPLE").-- "

---

Common Law is NOT removed or given away by the Constitution:

---

Again, from the Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788:

George Nicholas: "...But the"COMMON LAW" is "NOT EXCLUDED".

There is "NOTHING" in "that paper" (APP Note: referring to the US Constitution being considered) to warrant the assertion....

"... A bill of rights is only an acknowledgment of the "PREEXISTING CLAIM" "TO RIGHTS" "IN" "THE PEOPLE".

They "BELONG TO US AS MUCH" as if they had been inserted in the Constitution."..."

---

Common Law and the Law of Nature Can be best understood by reading "John Locke's Second Treatise on Civil Government"

In Full: http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc/Locke_Civil_Government/lo...

---

American Patriot Party.CC
http://www.americanpatriotparty.cc

Educate Yourself. Educate Others.

Now on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/pages/American-Patriot-Party-CC-Nat...

RichardTaylorAPP - Chair - American Patriot Party.CC

John Locke #201, 202, 212 to 232; Virginia and Kentucky Resolutions 1798; Virginia Ratifying Convention 6-16-1788; Rights of the Colonists 1772.

This reads like its out of

This reads like its out of Animal Farm

meekandmild's picture

Time to recall the school board

after these policies:
1. Board members will not address any speaking on an item that is not part of the official agenda.

2. A community member could not add an item to the agenda.

The School board forgot who its employers are.

No they didn't,

they are employees of the state. They operate on stolen money and they work to enforce the agenda of the rulers.