"Joel Koltner" wrote in message
...
"flipper" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 16:43:10 -0700, "Joel Koltner"
Well, the school board maintains the guy's dismissal had nothing to do
with
the song.
His tale explicitly states he was 'told' the song was the reason and
their deafening silence about what any other 'good reason' might be
doesn't help their claim.

Yes, it's his word against theirs as to why he was fired.

Few businesses will speak to the media regarding why someone was
terminated these days; there's a lot of risk doing so, and generally no
upside.

Last I heard the "public schools" were considered a 'government job'
and, so far, no one has offered any insight as to how his song could
'disrupt the workplace'.

Agreed, that's why they probably got him on some technicality such as
unauthorized use of the school's equipment.


So that makes it ok? Does that deserve a firing or a repremand? Would a
liberal have gotten the same treatment?

The fact of the matter is that the liberal principle didn't like it and
fired him... and liberals are suppose to be soooo tolerant of other peoples
views. After all, just look how hard they try to understand muslims.

Not to mention that, even if no state law to
the effect exists, one would think at least a hearing and chance to
discuss the matter would be common sense prudence.

Not an unreasonable request, but it doesn't bother me if an employer
chooses not to offer such a process either.

Does anyone know a case where a liberal was fired for a similar incident?

I'll bet you a nickel what really happened is...
If it's such a clear cut and plainly stated common policy then how
come no school official seems able to mention it?

See above. It's just S.O.P. for both private businesses as well as the
government these days.

It's just like calling for job references today -- most businesses will
only verify that someone worked for them for a specified period of time in
a given position but will refuse to provide infomration any regarding
their performance or reason for termination.


Possibly but lets be serious here for a moment. Isn't the most likely cause
that some liberal got "offended" because someone said something about their
messiah? They complained and this person was fired... mind you, FIRED. Not
repremanded but fired. This reaks of bias.

Now, it is possible that this guy is a total loon and they've been looking
for something to get rid of him. But we all know how liberals in power
behave as we have our prototypes Pelosi, Reed, and Obsama.


Neither would I, even if you substituted 42 for 43 and 43 for 44.
Which makes the additional charge it's 'racist' all the more absurd.

Yes.
On the other hand, racist racist racist is the new mind numbed robot
knee jerk substitute for liar liar liar.

Yep, absolutely correct. A lot of people apparently didn't pay quite
enough attention in school to learn what "racism" is; plenty of folks who
disagree with (1) Obama and (2) immigration policy are unfairly tarred
with the "racist" brush.


Maybe this is the new tolerance liberals have? If they don't agree with you
they simply tolerate you by making you into a racist? After all, they seem
to have no problem with tolerating muslims.