Salinas Grade School Named for Convicted Murderer
 

What kind of people name an elementary school after a convicted murderer?

The Hispanics who run Salinas CA, that's who.

Check out this LA Time story about a "firey" Mexican politician named Jose Castenada (he had straight F's in school) who is on the Salinas City Council and who supports a grade school named after infamous Mexican convicted robber & murderer Tiburcio Vasquez.

http://discussions.latimes.com/20/la...0130618-dto/10

Isn't this inspiring? A grade school named after a "Latino" who was convicted of murder and robbery in the 1800's. Just the kind of role model needed by "underperforming" Latino children who live in a "poor" community plagued by gangs and crime.

Time to go back to racially segregated schools. Give the blacks and browns their own schools and they can name them for whatever killers, robbers and dope dealers they want. The blacks can have OJ Simpson and Mumia Abu Jamal schools. The Hispanics can have Che Guevara and Fidel Castro schools, in addition to the more traditional robbers and murderers from the 1800's. They will continue to blame white "racism" for their dismal academic performance, but at least with segregated schools, white kids will have a chance at a decent education.

Go back to them? They have become them. Who would be the real beneficiary of segregated schools by law, when the majority are, as you call them, blacks and browns? It sure wouldn't be white people, because with blacks and browns in charge of the education system and the treasury, they'd just choke the services off and funnel them into the racially acclimated schools of their choice.
And I'm going to point out that you are incorrigible. So many times we've all pointed out your using this forum for a purpose that violates our agenda and rules, and yet you're right back with the same sheet (yes, pun intended) with your first post in weeks. If I was a judge in juvenile court, I'd send you to reform school.

Don,

That's a pretty broad brush you're painting with.

Castaneda is a brown supremacist knucklehead who dodges process servers and stiff arms reporters, is illegally holding two different elected positions, his name is within the state Attorney General's office, and certainly not all "Hispanics" approve of the man.

And it is true that Tiburcio Vasquez didn't have benefit of participating in a south of the border conflict such as the 1910 Mexican Revolution to somehow justify his depredations, but Castaneda is a loon cut from the same cloth as blathering blowhard school board member Gil Navarro of the Inland Empire... and Gil is a race obsessed nutball who does whacky, racially charged things that make little sense to most everyone else except for fellow demented brown racists.

On the other hand, you just can't let it go, can you. There will never again be any such thing as a "white only" school in California, so why don't you bury your obsession with peddling white separatism and do something useful for a change?

Scumbag minorities (like you) hold up killers as role models and then you attack me.

You pathetic losers fought tooth and nail to get into white class rooms, white neighborhoods and you still worship the scum of the earth with the same skin color as you. When whites have been exterminated and you're still living like animals, who will you blame then for your plight?

You brown losers name your public schools after killers and robbers, but you'd send me to reform school?

The problem with you losers is not white people but your disgusting culture that worships killers and thieves. Here in LA they built a memorial to Sal Castro, an activist "Latino" whose great contribution was to organize the 1968 Latino school walkout. Walking out of school! Now that's a great idea for success! At least Sal Castro didn't murder anybody. I guess that's some kind of progress.

As far as posting guidelines, the name of this forum is "California Schools" and the link to the LA Times story is about a California school. What's your problem?

You either didn't read the post or you're trying to over shout logic.

You are among the best friends brown racists ever had for their cause. Instead of working at inventing or exaggerating white racism to further their cause you gift wrap and hand it to them.

If it weren't for the damage you do, you would be prime time funny as a dogmatic buffoon, one who would piss his own pants rather than use a non segregated restroom, the blind man who pretends to see... one who might not realize that the main difference between someone like Castaneda and yourself is that Castaneda is a lot smarter concerning his polar opposite racial obsession and he sometimes knows when to shut up.

First of all Don, I'm half white and half brown. I've never gotten a definitive answer on you as to whether half-breeds like myself are polluted by inferior genes or not, and therefore unacceptable to you in any way

Second, in relation the rules posted here, they specifically address using the forum to promote racial exclusiveness, which is what your initial post was soliciting for. Those rules apply to all of the forum. I do get that you want racial exclusiveness and all, and that's your right to have your opinions. There are numerous outlets for you to promote that, but this isn't one of them.

Now I don't think anyone here, myself included likes or wants to see the type of willful and blatant racial worshipping of criminals or other morally reprehensible or repugnant people, especially so those in public schools. But to forumlate a statement that inherently links us to that mindset by virtue of our race is an assinine concept.

Please keep the color out of this everyone. My children are mixed and are great Americans. They love their country and don't take likely to race baiting. This kind of talk is what keeps this crap going. I'm sick of it. We have many different shades of colors and my children have suffered from all of this. Believe it or not a couple of years ago, I apologized because of my color. They were shocked. I for one will not do it to anyone else. They have felt the wrath from illegals and all of this other garbage more than I have.
Keep it clean, we forget what our purpose is.
Are we not all Americans?!

Unfortunately what you describe AG is very close to what is actually happening in our schools here in California. I am required to attend every School Board meeting in my district and I see first hand what is being proposed for our schools. Yes, services are being cut off in the areas where most of the minorities don't live and being funneled to where they do. Here is an article in the Sac. Bee. I've highlighted what Brown is trying to do.



Gov. Brown's school funding plan runs into lawmakers' concerns

Gov. Jerry Brown had hardly finished presenting his annual budget revision last week before state Sen. Ted Lieu lit up on Twitter with a burst of criticism of a major part of the plan, a bid to shift more state aid to poor and English-learning students.
"Instead of working together to help all kids," said Lieu, D-Torrance, Brown's funding formula "pits teacher against teacher, community against community, parent against parent."Assemblywoman Joan Buchanan, D-Alamo, convened a hearing on the matter in the Assembly Education Committee the next day, and Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, reiterated his own reservations about the proposal. He said lawmakers will model the effect of Brown's education proposal "region by region, district by district."

In many ways, resistance to Brown's proposal to overhaul California's school financing system is a function of simple math.

Though a majority of California's more than 6 million schoolchildren live in urban and rural districts expected to benefit from Brown's proposal, all but a handful of lawmakers who will vote on the measure represent at least one school district identified by the Department of Education as a potential loser.

"If a district defines itself as a winner or loser, right or wrong, that's what these lawmakers are going to care about," said Kevin Gordon, a longtime education lobbyist. "It's what drives a lot of the skepticism."

Brown was on the defensive last week, laboring to "clarify some common misperceptions" about his plan. He said the most controversial part of his proposal – to provide money to especially needy districts at the expense of wealthier ones – would amount to just 4 percent of total spending, with the rest distributed on a per-pupil basis partly to all students and partly to disadvantaged students statewide.

Brown dismissed a California Department of Education projection that more than half of state school districts could receive less money under this formula than they might under existing law. In his annual budget revision Tuesday, he called it a "very small part" of his plan.

That Brown was forced to address the matter at all suggests how difficult district-level considerations may be for the Democratic governor to overcome.
Asked if he thought he had done enough to mollify resistant lawmakers, Brown said, "I think the idea in a Democratic Legislature of helping the less advantaged is very persuasive."
Brown has endeavored to minimize district-by-district comparisons.
While criticizing the Department of Education analysis for its reliance on uncertain funding assumptions, the administration has refused to endorse a comparison of its own. Because of the complexities of school finance and the uncertainty of future political decisions, officials said it is impossible to accurately project how school funding would be allocated if Brown's proposal is not adopted.

Brown said no school district would receive less money under his plan than it does now, only that some districts with greater funding needs will do "considerably better" than others. This is NOT TRUE!!
Legislators not reassured
For many lawmakers, that assurance is insufficient. The Department of Education analysis, said Buchanan, is "a big deal."
Buchanan, who chairs the Assembly Education Committee, is one of two Assembly members, along with Diane Harkey, R- Because Dana Point is a wealthier district."It's a struggle for me, because I completely understand what the governor's trying to do," Buchanan said. "You can talk to people in my district who say, 'I can understand not getting as much, but we want our kids to have textbooks.' "
Like Steinberg, Buchanan has called for a greater proportion of the $1.9 billion Brown proposes to spend next year on restructuring the education system to be distributed statewide.
Brown did not offer such a concession in his budget revision, but he did move to please education interests in other ways. He proposed accelerating the repayment to local school districts of state aid deferred in previous years, and he offered $1 billion in one-time funding to help implement English, math and other education standards.
Brown offered to increase first-year spending overall on his education plan by $240 million, and he included about $218 million in continued funding for popular regional occupational centers and home-to-school transportation programs.
He left intact his proposal to eliminate most of California's categorical funds – money that can be used only for certain purposes – in an effort to give local districts greater flexibility in how they spend state money.
Following the release of a counterproposal last month, Senate Democrats released a list of school districts they said would not qualify for additional funding under Brown's plan, despite containing individual schools with high poverty.
Among districts on the list was Folsom Cordova Unified School District, which includes wealthy neighborhoods of Folsom and poorer pockets of Rancho Cordova."We're the losers," said Rhonda Crawford, the district's chief financial officer. "All of us in education, I think we all agree that something needs to be done and he's on the right track with this, but it's just that we, as one of the districts that is severely impacted by this, we just are asking for just a little extra time to look at the formulas and look at those discrepancies between districts."
Folsom Cordova expects to receive as much as $700 less per student than allowed by existing law under the governor's formula by the time it is fully implemented, or about $12 million annually, Crawford said.
"It's just not good for kids," she said.
Assemblyman Ken Cooley, the Rancho Cordova Democrat who represents the area, said that with Brown's proposal so closely following years of budget cuts to local schools, "I think what Californians expect is to see sort of broad-based improvement in education. … A scenario where you have truly winners and losers is not right."Some areas benefit greatly
Brown's proposal would generally be more advantageous for urban and rural school districts than for wealthier, suburban ones. In some of California's poorest areas, the benefit may be great.The massive Bakersfield City School District, where about 84 percent of students are low-income, could receive more than $1,000 more per student under Brown's funding formula than under existing law, according to the Department of Education analysis. Wasco Union Elementary School District, where nearly 90 percent of students are low-income, could receive more than $1,800 per student more."That 4 percent for these districts like Wasco is huge," said Michael Hulsizer, chief deputy for government affairs at the Kern County Office of Education.
Michael W. Kirst, president of the state Board of Education and a Stanford University professor emeritus who co-wrote a 2008 paper that became the model for Brown's proposal, said district-level comparisons have contributed to a "political battle" and distracted focus from broader policy concerns.
"You can manipulate assumptions to show anything, but the proposal that's out there by the governor is out there, and not the alternative assumptions about the future that make it look bad," he said.
Kirst said opposition may be overstated. Budget negotiations between the governor and lawmakers are only now beginning, and Kirst said changes Brown made in the budget revision may help some districts enough to satisfy the lawmakers representing them.
Still, Kirst said, "You can't make everybody 100 percent happy. There are tradeoffs in any school finance plan unless you have just all the money in the world."

This is from the LA Times and discusses ethnisity

Gov. Jerry Brown pitches education budget at East L.A. school


Brown said Humphreys Avenue Elementary was precisely the place that would get more aid and that the school deserved it.
"We’re trying to compensate a little bit for the difference between living in this neighborhood... [and] in Beverly Hills,” said Brown, standing with local dignitaries in front of the campus multipurpose room.
At Humphreys, about 98% of students are Latino, 100% are low income and about 50% are learning to speak and read in English.Brown's goal is to take 20% of the education allotment and distribute it based on the characteristics of the individual students enrolled in a school. Four percent would be reserved for schools with the highest concentration of the hardest-to-educate students.
"When you have more than 50% of kids in poverty or speaking another language, that is an extra barrier,” Brown said.
L.A. Unified could be a huge beneficiary, and has, in fact, based its own budget on the success of Brown's initiative, which gave L.A. schools Supt. John Deasy substantial motivation to be supportive.
"Students need to be funded for situations beyond their control,” Deasy said. "Equity delayed is equity denied.”
The stakes for L.A. were made clear by the group that had assembled, which included local teachers union president Warren Fletcher, who has lately been at odds with Deasy. On Friday the two exhibited nothing but common cause.
Those on hand also included L.A. Area Chamber of Commerce president Gary L. Toebben and United Way of Greater Los Angeles chief executive Elise Buik.
Humphreys Principal Ricardo Tapanes said the state recession cut into resources for his campus of 827 students, one of the larger elementary schools in the state. Class size in the early grades increased from about 20 to about 24 students per teacher. Class sizes in the upper grades increased from 25 to about 30. He also had to cut back on intervention services that provide extra help for students.
He has a nurse only two days a week to assist students and families that often lack regular healthcare. He said he could use a full-time counselor and a psychiatric social worker.
Ads by Google

"A lot of the issues have to do with the home life," said Tapanes, noting a range of challenges such as lice infestations, deficient nutrition and child-abuse reporting.
Brown has encountered bipartisan resistance from lawmakers who represent other kinds of school systems, so his visit was intended as political marketing to buttress his budget release this week. Brown argues that his proposal redirects new state funding that has come through an improving economy and voter-approved taxes. But school systems statewide are still trying to recover from reduced funding of past years.
The governor took a swipe at Democrats who haven't sided with him and also placed his plan in the context of a nationwide imperative for economic equity.
"As a society we’re getting more unequal every year and that’s going to tear us apart,” Brown said. "People of goodwill will see we’re all in it together.”
He left East L.A. for another similar event at a school in Long Beach.
[For the record 12:50 p.m. May 20: An earlier version of this post incorrectly stated that 6% of Brown's education allotment would be reserved for schools with the highest concentration of the hardest-to-educate students. The correct number is 4%.]

I don't like racists of any color, nor have I ever apologized for my color.

I write a lot of the things I do because so many people do judge on color rather than the individual, and I oppose bigots of any color.

My primary concern is about illegal migration, but so many make it about race. I will state again that the only difference between a white supremacist and a Latino activist is that they work opposite corners of the same street, they both have similar goals, and they need each other to stir up racial enmity among everyone else in order to achieve very similar goals - to push everyone not of their own race out of the United States, or at the very least, selective parts of it.

The issue of illegal immigration is just on any side of it only if it is about economics and legal issues concerning the illegally present, or any other sort of migration for that matter, because race includes (or excludes) others without regard to nationality or legality of presence.

People like Don sabotage the effort because the issue of race is already stacked against those who would see that immigration law be enforced. You need to correctly identify the enemy, or you loose the war.

In light of correctly identifying the enemy:

The biggest enemy are American politicians, Republicans and Democrats, who have aided and abetted illegal migration for decades. Currently they are supposedly in some big fight concerning border security in the proposed immigration bill, but there is not a peep out of a single one of them about prosecuting, incarcerating, and seizing the ill gotten gains of - as provided for in current law - the next enemy:

American employers of illegal aliens.

There has been so much political theater during the last few decades in which the Border Patrol hung out at bus stops and the resultant hysteria over profiling, or the unproductive "workplace raids" where illegals are chased past the manager's office, out the back door, and through the field. If any of the American administrations over the last 80 years had been serious about illegal migration the corrective procedure would have figuratively followed the ancient Roman method: The first order of business would have been to gather up the establishment management and crucify every one of them, and then deal with whatever rabble they could could capture.

And none of that crap about employers not knowing the status of their employees: they know exactly what they hire.

Then there are the relatively small but extremely loud self appointed groups of American racists on either side of the issue who presume to speak for everyone of whatever race they happen to be themselves. Both sides are wrong in their bigotry, but political correctness exclusively favors one side. Equal acts make one an egregious race hater but the other is magically transformed into being "proud of his culture". It's a double standard, but that's the way it is with no cure except to rise above racist agitation and educate with the truth. It's a steep climb with more than a mountain of obstruction.

Many would describe the aforementioned Jose Castaneda as being Mexican, but in truth it's the American experience from childhood which enables Casteneda to do what he's doing politically, otherwise he would be working in a tire shop or having some part of constructing shabbily built tract housing.

American schools with social engineering and propagandization. I believe that Ignatius of Loyola, founder of the Jesuits, said "Give a boy of 7 years old, and he will be mine for life". Ethnic studies professors make a living peddling racial hatred with propaganda laden study material. The American University is how Castaneda got to where he is now and why he is doing what he does.

American Media. We fully know what biased prevaricators they are, no explanation needed here.

The Mexican Government. Migration of any type to the United States forestalls public demand for meaningful reform, it's a way to deal with overpopulation in relation to the economy, the national income from remittances is huge, and migration is a way to poke a sharp stick into the American eye.

American descendants of Latin Americans are a grab bag of thought, persuasions, identity, loyalties; they are not all the same person as both white supremacists and brown supremacists make them out to be. There is a constant drumbeat of "the white man is out to get you" directed at quite a few of them, I believe opposition to enforcing immigration law with those whose family have been here for generations or whose parents migrated legally would be the perception of white racism in the Republican party. Jobs and the economy are a more pressing concern, and employers tend to hire the newly arrived over the native born.

Then there are the illegals themselves. They are the imported symptom of the American disease. The popular conception is that they come to take American jobs, but the reality is they take jobs that employers have wilfully displaced American citizens of all ancestries in violation of American law. We judge foreign nationals according to our nominal standards, but there is a whole different thought process from Latin America. Some are extremely moral, some are the epitome of evil, with most somewhere in the middle. There is a difference in Latin America as to what is written law and what is concrete reality. A Mexican would equate hiring a lawyer with bribing the judge, whereas we see it as hiring a Representative to present a case before jury which is presided over by a judge who interprets the law in regard to the proceedings. It's why there are so many sidewalk food vendors in violation of the health codes, it's why the majority see absolutely nothing wrong with just picking up and walking across the border.

The illegal is right in front of us, so we tend to focus on him and ignore the cause. While the symptom of illegality of presence disease must be addressed, the cure for the American disease is politcianectomy in Washington DC.

That was perfectly stated. Really enjoyed reading it.