(12-17-2020 03:34 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  David,

You seem to believe that some secret cabal of un-elected officials (although properly appointed by the school board) are somehow in control of things and that just because people can't drone on ad nauseum at a meeting that their voice is somehow being silenced. I've covered enough public hearings to know that most people have no idea how to argue a point succinctly or keep from repeating themselves. A time limit on public comments is usually welcome.


Best
Rob

[O]ne public commentator made a comment about the unfairness inflicted upon President George Washington. The facilitator (a first grade teacher in the San Francisco School District, Jeremiah Jefferies) cut her off. In this same Zoom meeting, a panel member raised the issue of hiring American historians to review the panel’s final recommendations for renaming of particular San Francisco schools. The same panel facilitator abruptly informed the panelist that there were be no appropriation of School District funds for such an expenditure.

Another time, a different panel member made the point that none of the panel members had been forwarded any of the emails from the public that the administrators for the panel process had received (thereby, insulating the panel from considering any public comments regarding the fairness of the school renaming process).

Laura Dudnick, the public relations manager for the school district, said in an email:

“The panel has gone through a process to set standards for why the name of a school would be changed, to research to the best of their ability the backgrounds of the individuals or places that are namesakes for a school, and analyzed those under the panel’s established guiding principles. From this process, the panel generated 42 schools covering 44 campuses that it intends to recommend to the board.”

My Letter to the Editor, at the end of the second paragraph, reads:

I believe that the full Board will simply approve, with little or no discussion, the “blue-ribbon” panel’s carefully researched recommendations for individual school name changes, and then commit by a vote of the elected San Francisco School Board members to appropriate the expenditure of $10 million of public funds, and thereby, unjustly and unfairly dishonor the character and reputation of men such as President Abraham Lincoln and President George Washington by renaming San Francisco public schools named in their honor.

Mr. Quentin Kopp in his commentary piece in the November issue of the Richmond Review made the following statement regarding the San Francisco School Board process for consideration of renaming several public schools in San Francisco for just cause:

“Appalling is the word best descriptive of the Board of Education which, confronting a multi-million dollar deficit and virus impediments to classroom instruction, plans to change the names of 44 San Francisco public schools . . . . The estimated renaming cost is $10 million.”

Guiding Principles for SFUSD School Names Advisory Committee
Approved by Committee on July 17, 2020

Guiding Principles:
For identifying school names to be changed, the committee will use any of the following criteria:
We will seek to change the names of schools that are named for:
Second item listed: Slave owners or participants in enslavement.

It is indisputable that General and President George Washington was a slave owner.

Lincoln Discussion Symposium Post by David Lockmiller
RE: In San Francisco, Virus is Contained but Schools Are Still Closed – Post #38. 11-18-20

Before the start of each Zoom meeting of the Renaming of Schools Committee, there is a short period of time allocated to accept public comments. For the August 12, 2020 meeting, an older lady was accepted to speak. When she did speak, she spoke critically of the Renaming of Schools Committee’s evidence evaluation and consideration process. She began her public comments at “12:30”.

The lady’s prepared comments from which she obviously read, particularly relating to the efficacy of the School Board panel’s renaming process, began at “13:00”and were as follows:

“My comments today are to make noise(?) because of what John Lewis would call “Good Trouble.” Because I have seen something in the working papers, which only include negative comments. To me, this is akin to a trial in which there is no defense and only the prosecutors are allowed to present their case. And their argument leapfrogs over to the jurors and sentencing. For example, I think that it’s appalling, and shall I say, maybe even outrageous, that the working papers of this committee make no mention of George Washington’s leading the Continental Army at Delaware and Valley Forge. And he was the first one to sign our Constitution and was our first President. Washington . . .” [At “13:54”, the panel’s facilitator cut her off, by saying “Emily (?), you’re out of time.” I could see on my computer screen that the facilitator had been closely monitoring her permitted amount of time to make comments.] Emily continued briefly: “Without these men, we would become an aristocracy with a King.” [“14:04”]

Post #39, 11-19-2020.
The August 12, 2020 meeting of the Renaming Panel was both very informative and very uninformative.

According to the minutes of the previous meeting, the July 29, Meeting Agenda item #5 – the “Selection of school Names to be considered for renaming” – “was tabled due to time restrictions.” There was no public discussion at the July 29, 2020 Zoom public meeting of placing the name of Abraham Lincoln, or any other name, on the “Yes” list.

The following are meeting notes that I made regarding this key August 12, 2020 public Zoom meeting of the Renaming panel.

August 12, 2020 meeting notes: [this was a hyperlink to the online public Zoom meeting]

@ 37:00 mark and forward, discussion about criteria basics for name change and possibly having historians coming in before panel to discuss various names. The panel’s facilitator informed the panel member that there would be no appropriation for historians.

@39:50 “judge and jury” discussion

@42:50 committee member says that the members have not been receiving emails from the public.

@54:00 beginning discussion of Abraham Lincoln

@55:08 a big yes and no discussion and a laugh from the facilitator

Public comment at October 7, 2020 meeting @ 9:10 from Father John Chesterman, class of 1949 at Abraham Lincoln High School, asking why the name is being changed.

Press Release: Letter to SFUSD from Alumni Associations Against Schools’ Name Changes
BY SAN FRANCISCO RICHMOND REVIEW ON OCTOBER 12, 2020 •

This committee’s one-sided, embarrassing misreading of historical facts does not promote education or shared values. We need an inclusive process that will allow all communities to be heard, use professional historians applying verifiable data, issue a written report why a school name might be changed so the community can make a considered decision, and suspend the current process until everyone can safely return to school sites for the robust and thoughtful conversations you directed in the original Board resolution. Finally, in the midst of the District’s financial difficulties, we wonder where will the District find the estimated $9 million ($150-200,000 per school) needed to make these proposed name changes.

The two charges have been made against President Abraham Lincoln by the Renaming of Schools Panel:

Dakota 38

Massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho people by the U.S. Army

The Sand Creek massacre (also known as the Chivington massacre, the battle of Sand Creek or the massacre of Cheyenne Indians) was a massacre of Cheyenne and Arapaho people by the U.S. Army in the American Indian Wars that occurred on November 29, 1864, when a 675-man force of the Third Colorado Cavalry] under the command of U.S. Army Colonel John Chivington attacked and destroyed a village of Cheyenne and Arapaho people in southeastern Colorado Territory, killing and mutilating an estimated 70–500 Native Americans, about two-thirds of whom were women and children. The location has been designated the Sand Creek Massacre National Historic Site and is administered by the National Park Service. This was part of a series of events known as the Colorado War and was preceded by the Hungate massacre.

Chivington and 425 men of the 3rd Colorado Cavalry rode to Fort Lyon arriving on November 28, 1864. Once at the fort, Chivington took command of 250 men of the 1st Colorado Cavalry and maybe as many as 12 men of the 1st Regiment New Mexico Volunteer Infantry, then set out for Black Kettle's encampment. James Beckwourth, noted frontiersman, acted as guide for Chivington. The following morning, Chivington gave the order to attack. Two officers, Captain Silas Soule and Lieutenant Joseph Cramer, commanding Company D and Company K of the First Colorado Cavalry, refused to obey and told their men to hold fire.

However, the rest of Chivington's men immediately attacked the village. Ignoring the U.S. flag and a white flag that was run up shortly after the attack began, they murdered as many of the Indians as they could.

I saw the bodies of those lying there cut all to pieces, worse mutilated than any I ever saw before; the women cut all to pieces ... With knives; scalped; their brains knocked out; children two or three months old; all ages lying there, from sucking infants up to warriors ... By whom were they mutilated? By the United States troops ...

— John S. Smith, Congressional Testimony of Mr. John S. Smith, 1865

Jis' to think of that dog Chivington and his dirty hounds, up thar at Sand Creek. His men shot down squaws, and blew the brains out of little innocent children. You call sich soldiers Christians, do ye? And Indians savages? What der yer s'pose our Heavenly Father, who made both them and us, thinks of these things? I tell you what, I don't like a hostile red skin any more than you do. And when they are hostile, I've fought 'em, hard as any man. But I never yet drew a bead on a squaw or papoose, and I despise the man who would.

— Kit Carson to Col. James Rusling

The critical and imperative question to ask in fairness and justice to the character and reputation of President Abraham Lincoln is this: What could President Abraham Lincoln have done beforehand to prevent war crimes being committed upon defenseless Native American Indians – men, women, and children - by Union soldiers following the orders and commands of a commissioned Union officer?

My point proven.

Best
Rob

(12-17-2020 08:57 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  My point proven.

Best
Rob

I believe that there is "diabolical historical mischief" occurring in this instance.

I believe that Jeremiah Jeffries, a first grade teacher who apparently has little or no educational training in American History, was hand-selected by the elected School Board members to be the Renaming of Schools Panel facilitator. He would be the one in control of the operations and agenda for all public meetings of the Panel.

By consensus, the Panel established the following Guiding Principles for SFUSD School Names Advisory Committee. (Approved by Committee on July 17, 2020.)

Guiding Principles: For identifying school names to be changed, the committee will use any of the following criteria. We will seek to change the names of schools that are named for:

• Anyone directly involved in the colonization of people
• Slave owners or participants in enslavement
• Perpetuators of genocide or slavery
• Those who exploit workers/people
• Those who directly oppressed or abused women, children, queer or transgender people
• Those connected to any human rights or environmental abuses
• Those who are known racists and/or white supremacists and/or espoused racist beliefs

No other character evidence need be or would be considered by the Panel members. A violation of any Guiding Principle would be both necessary and sufficient “to change the names of schools that are named” for any historical figures previously so honored by the citizens of San Francisco.

Pope Francis in a November 26, 2020 New York Times opinion piece wrote: “It is all too easy for some to take an idea — in this case, for example, personal freedom — and turn it into an ideology, creating a prism through which they judge everything.”

Regarding General and President George Washington and many other historical names, the Guiding Principles listed for SFUSD School Names Advisory Committee, is the “prism through which they have judged everything.”

This short list of Guiding Principles specifically includes, “slave owners or participants in enslavement.” It is indisputable that General and President George Washington was a slave owner. Therefore, President George Washington is guilty as charged.

Never mind that as Emily stated in the short time permitted by the Panel’s facilitator: “I think that it’s appalling, and shall I say, maybe even outrageous, that the working papers of this committee make no mention of George Washington’s leading the Continental Army at Delaware and Valley Forge. And he was the first one to sign our Constitution and was our first President.”

More recently, the Presidents of five San Francisco High School Alumni Associations, who appear to have been alarmed by the proceedings of the Renaming of Schools Panel, issued a Press Release of their Letter to the San Francisco Unified School District (RICHMOND REVIEW -- OCTOBER 12, 2020).

These five Presidents of SF Schools Alumni Associations united in making three specific recommendations to correct what they perceived to be deficiencies in the Renaming of Schools Panel's processes:

1. Use professional historians applying verifiable data.
2. Issue a written report why a school name might be changed so the community can make a considered decision.
3. Suspend the current process until everyone can safely return to school sites for the robust and thoughtful conversations as directed in the original Board resolution.

Obviously, the elected School Board members rejected all three of these recommendations made by the five San Francisco High School Alumni Associations on October 12, 2020 in the Renaming of Schools process by the Panel.

President Abraham Lincoln’s case was different for the Renaming of Schools Panel. The charges against President Lincoln were issues of actual historical facts.

Two charges were made against President Abraham Lincoln: First, President Lincoln had signed the execution orders for the Dakota 38, the largest mass execution of American Indians in the history of the United States. And, second, Abraham Lincoln was President of the United States when a Union officer in Colorado ordered that war crimes be committed by troops under his command against hundreds of defenseless Cheyanne and Arappapo Indians – men, women, and children.

These are both false allegations of moral wrongs committed by President Abraham Lincoln against American Indians. Historians have proven these allegations to be false.

I have made detailed defenses, in words of historians, against both charges in posts made on this thread.

Nonetheless, President Abraham Lincoln will be confirmed by the Panel to have violated on two occasions, at least one of the Panel's strict guidelines for renaming of San Francisco Schools for just cause(s).

There will be little or no evidence in the public record for the elected members of the San Francisco School Board to consider; and, most certainly, not in any of the public Zoom meeting Panel discussions on the issues of President Abraham Lincoln.

I believe that the elected Board members will merely apply the rubber stamp of their public Brown Act approval and the deed is done. The name of President Abraham Lincoln will have been dishonored for unjust causes and there will no longer be an Abraham Lincoln High School in San Francisco, California, the city where I live.

The members of the San Francisco School Board could have easily ordered the Panel to follow the "just and fair" procedural recommendations of the united five San Francisco High School Alumni Associations Presidents, but the elected members of the San Francisco School Board chose not to do so. The Panel is the tail; the elected School Board is the dog.

Sometimes I feel like I'm tilting at windmills with this discussion. That you seem to think Pope Francis supports your point is definitely a novel argument. However it is ridiculous.

So when do you plan to run for a seat on the school board?

Best
Rob

I'll vote for you David.
I've got some friends in Georgia that said getting registered to vote in CA would be no problem.
they have some kind of reciprocal arrangement.

I see that there's a school in San Francisco called Roosevelt . Its in or near Presidents Heights, so I assumed its named after Pres Roosevelt. I believe that Eleanor was anxious to have anti lynching legislation introduced. ... but FDR wasnt keen on losing votes and took no action to bring it in. Maybe the school's name should be changed ?

( There's also the breach of Civil Liberties when American citizens of Japanese or German background were interned in 1942 )

(12-18-2020 06:24 PM)AussieMick Wrote:  I see that there's a school in San Francisco called Roosevelt . Its in or near Presidents Heights, so I assumed its named after Pres Roosevelt. I believe that Eleanor was anxious to have anti lynching legislation introduced. ... but FDR wasnt keen on losing votes and took no action to bring it in. Maybe the school's name should be changed ?

( There's also the breach of Civil Liberties when American citizens of Japanese or German background were interned in 1942 )

Potentially there could be no end to the renaming.

This could be a little long, but I think I have found a solution.
We can't give schools a persons name, we don't want to point out someone's good characteristics to give the children something to aspire to. We have to point out their shortcomings, mistakes they might have made. It seems, according to the school officials in charge of all this, people who have achieved something, helped others improve their lives, have in the minds of the school officials done some pretty rotten stuff. These people we have named many of our schools after don't deserve that honor and are offensive. At least that's what they want us to believe.

We can't name a school after an animal, for pretty much the same reasons. And animals shed, molt, leave messes on sidewalks, cars, in parks and lawns, some even smell bad. The animal rights people will find something to be offended by. Some animals are dangerous. Snakes, cougars, wild cats, dogs, even bears. Soon we can be offended that a vicious bear is on the California state flag and demand it be removed and replaced by a jelly bean. Whoops, can't do that because Ronald Reagan liked jelly beans and had a large jar of them on his desk. They are full of sugar, and that's not good for your health. We can move on to that after this school name change gets fixed.

It's quite a problem. What's a highly intelligent, someone who has been selected because their smart, supposed to do? How can an egocentric, attention grabbing public servant use this opportunity to to their advantage? How do you reach a solution without solving the problem.

The answer is relatively simple, which is probably why they haven't thought about it. It doesn't require an expensive education at a prestigious school. It doesn't require a high IQ, which is why I figured it out. It doesn't make one look wise and understanding, which is why it will never be tried.

Let's first look at what has happened. School officials have created a problem where none existed, over emphasized the seriousness of this self created problem, and shown to the public that they are the ones to correct this terrible injustice. Not only that, they have stirred up the public, grabbed the attention of local media, and gained national attention. Ergo, they have fed their ego.

What will happen next? What's my insight into this issue?
That all depends. It depends on what television network offers me a job as a consultant for this exciting new made for tv, drama series.
I'm not greedy, I will demand that David and Rob be hired too as writers and consultants. Who knows, we might even be able to write this forum into part of the story.

I hope Lincoln Man is right, there could be no end to this renaming.
So stayed tuned for future developments. We might need some help with product merchandising

Quote:School officials have created a problem where none existed, over emphasized the seriousness of this self created problem, and shown to the public that they are the ones to correct this terrible injustice. Not only that, they have stirred up the public, grabbed the attention of local media, and gained national attention. Ergo, they have fed their ego.

That's pretty cynical Gene. It could also be that a group of people who have long not had their voices heard are saying enough, and it's time we have a say in what our community honors. If they can find enough people to go along with it, they will likely be successful. If the board votes in January to allow the name changes to proceed, the sun will come up the next day and everything will continue to move forward. No matter how silly some people (myself included) think this whole thing has become, Lincoln will survive. And if he doesn't, he wasn't worth celebrating to begin with. I'm not worried.

Best
Rob

I enjoy these discussions Rob.
I agree some of my comments could be considered cynical.

And thank you for the Happy Holiday card.
For those of you who don't know, we are friends who enjoy the different ways we view issues and can discuss respectfully, even we we aggravate each other.

Quote:For those of you who don't know, we are friends who enjoy the different ways we view issues and can discuss respectfully, even we we aggravate each other.

Don't tell him folks, but the only reason I like him is because he knows where to find good pizza, Oh, and the fact that he married up.

Best
Rob

(12-18-2020 12:08 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  So when do you plan to run for a seat on the school board?

Best
Rob

I should submit my paperwork today for the next election.

A majority of the elected San Francisco School Board members are likely to vote to rename Abraham Lincoln High School in January or February, 2021. Publicly, they will state they do so on the the basis of the consensus recommendation and historical issues analysis work of its own appointed "blue ribbon" Renaming of Schools Panel.

According to recent press reports, the two issues regarding President Abraham Lincoln that were addressed by the Renaming of Schools Panel were: 1) President Abraham Lincoln's role in the execution of the Dakota 38 and 2) President Abraham Lincoln's personal culpability for the 1864 massacre in Colorado of hundreds of defenseless Cheyenne and Arapaho Indians - men, women, and children - by U. S. troops under the command and orders of a Union Army officer.

Rob, suppose you were the incumbent President of the San Francisco Board of Education in the next School Board election and in our debate I asked of you the same question that I previously posed regarding this second issue:

The critical and imperative question to ask in fairness and justice to the character and reputation of President Abraham Lincoln is this: What could President Abraham Lincoln have done beforehand to prevent war crimes being committed upon defenseless Native American Indians – men, women, and children - by Union soldiers following the orders and commands of a commissioned Union officer?

As President of the San Francisco Board of Education, who voted to dishonor the name of President Abraham Lincoln, by ordering under the School Board's exclusive legislative authority the renaming of Abraham Lincoln High School in San Francisco for just causes, how would you honestly and forthrightly answer that question, Rob?

That's a fair question David.

However, you are under the assumption that I agree with what the board is doing. As I have stated on several occasions, I don't. I think it is historically illiterate and short-sighted on the part of the board.

But I don't live in San Francisco. It isn't my right, or even my duty, to tell members of the school board or the community that what they are doing is wrong, unless the board or members of the community asked for my opinion. Of course, as an American I'm free to give my opinion on forums or even as an article written to persuade, but my opinion will have no more weight than the next persons. Even though I don't agree with the proposed action, the community, through its elected representatives, has the final say. As I have repeatedly said if the board is wrong, they will pay for it in the next election.

My argument remains that if statues in Virginia can be toppled and schools renamed because of anti-Confederate sentiment, because that is what the local community wants, one has to accept that it can also be done for people that many admire, if the community so chooses.

I will give you some unsolicited advice which you can either accept or reject. When you run for the board you need to be aware of the type of language that you use. It's one thing to tell someone they are wrong. It's quite another, and insulting, to accuse someone of doing something malicious just because you disagree with it, unless you have evidence to the contrary. If you want to garner enough support to be elected, you need to explain to the public how and why you are running and what you can accomplish and what needs to be accomplished. Having studied and covered politics for half of my life, I can guarantee if you use the same language out there that you have here, you will go down to defeat, and soundly. One issue candidates rarely get enough support to be successful.

I also want to add that even though I don't think the renaming makes much sense at this point--a point that Mayor Breed forcefully made--I understand why it is being done. Conservatives can thumb their nose at the idea of white privilege and oppression, but the fact remains that a large number of people accept both concepts as reality, and that number continues to grow.

A person is free to reject that, but they do so at their own peril.

Best
Rob

(12-19-2020 01:21 PM)Rob Wick Wrote:  That's a fair question David.

However, you are under the assumption that I agree with what the board is doing. As I have stated on several occasions, I don't.

Best
Rob

Please point out to me those "several occasions" where you have disagreed "with what the board is doing." I must have missed some of them.

Well, let's see. On November 9, 2020 in post #9 on this very thread I wrote

Quote:While I personally oppose what's going on here, does anyone really believe that one school district, or one college, taking such action would somehow change American or the world's view of Lincoln?

On December 16, 2020 in post #44 I wrote

Quote: If the local community doesn't want to hear about the numerous lives that Lincoln saved in the Dakota tribe, that is their right regardless of how historically illiterate it may be. You can't stop someone intent on being a fool from themselves.

Further in that post I wrote

Quote:I don't think what you're doing is saving the character and reputation of Lincoln from dishonor. I think what you're doing is saying that the majority of American citizens can't see unbridled nonsense for what it really is, and that Lincoln has to be protected because his reputation is that tenuous.

While we're doing this, as to your other hobbyhorse, the 1619 Project, in your thread "Abraham Lincoln Statues" on October 14, 2020 in post #25 I wrote

Quote: A lie requires agency on behalf of the liar, and while you may disagree with what the Times reported (and to be honest, I have issues with it myself), you cannot prove that the paper set out to be purposefully dishonest.

On October 17 in post #30 I wrote

Quote:I don't know if you forgot or ignored the fact that I said I have issues with the 1619 Project, but mine has to do with the lack of other voices in Nikole Hannah-Jones' writings. Again, your rejection seems based in your attempts to cleanse Lincoln for the modern reader, which I don't think he needs.

On October 18, 2020, post #34 I wrote

Quote:As to your request, I also have never said I had an objection to their criticism of the 1619 Project. My whole objection to any of this is that it is a tempest in a teapot.

On Lincoln and the Dakota Indians in the same thread on October 16, 2020, post #27 I wrote

Quote:Finally, as to whether or not the execution of the 38 Native Americans represented Lincoln's humanity or something else, I would say that the 38 executed, and their families, would beg to differ. While we can make our peace with what Lincoln did, or didn't do, that someone else can see it differently is the lifeblood of historical debate. I feel our biggest difference is that you see Lincoln as the great, good man, and I see Lincoln as simply a man, good in some instances and, like all men, less great in others. I welcome those who see Lincoln as less than heroic. It makes him much more human.

In a much earlier post that you started in 2013, on August 16, 2013 in post #19 I wrote

Quote:As for those "savages" it seems obvious that Lincoln must have thought something was wrong with the verdicts or he wouldn't have taken the political risk of commuting the sentences of so many.

So I think over the years I've done more than enough to show what I believe and why. That I can appreciate the nuance in things is something that a potential candidate for any office might try to acquire.

Best
Rob