Sam Hammar and Rob Dolan teamed up to host college kids for an Override Forum. Dolan surfacing to promote One Melrose, YES is interesting. The details of his disgraced exit is widely known and certainly won’t be welcomed by the Lincoln School PTO. Did SH get a job since her loss to Jason Lewis? Maybe she is trying to get a job in Lynnfield. If PB becomes Mayor, will he replace JLB with SH? OH, Melrose politics!
I don’t know any college kids that pay property taxes.
80% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck. Many folks in Melrose (including my family) live paycheck to paycheck and cannot afford an Override. The college kids RD and SH “inspired” may have families in the 20% who do not have to worry about money. Jobs are a good thing and people expect to get paid (are the Repugs and Trump listening?). Political patronage, “family” connections and political games are partly why politics are disrespected by a majority of people. Until and unless politics are practiced differently, distrust will continue. We need new leaders who will act differently not a Dolan or Hammar. When and how did SH become “important” to Melrose?
pathetic pandering by chronically ethically challenged pols
Getting college kids who don’t own property to vote for the override. Now that is slithery.
Let’s go back 10 or so years when Dolan told us adding 600 apartments to the city would be good for our tax base. That it would be mostly singles and couples who use public transportation renting. The reality of today is, they are continuing to add apartments, families with children are renting these apartments, traffic is getting worse, and not only are they not helping our taxes, they are over burdening our schools requiring actual property owners to pay more taxes. Nope. I don’t trust any politician in the city. Vote No.
The Mystery is Solved......Identity Reveal.......Oh Come On, Man
is.....our SC Chair, Ed......postings all make sense now......!!!!
Slithery. That's an excellent way to describe our beloved ex-Mayor.
Do you you think he'd even be involved if his kid had gotten into Mystic Valley? Just sayin'.
No, not really. It sort of depends on the character and past actions of the two people, don't you think? In both cases here, and in one case in particular, the chief charlatan largely responsible for this mess, given historical perspective derision is well-deserved.
Your comments aren't much of an improvement. It's a mischaracterization at best, and another outright lie at worst. Point to one instance where anyone here or citywide has been critical of higher education as a concept. Anyone with even half a brain appreciates the value of higher education. The comments here have been universally directed at the motivations and truthfulness of those proposing this override, whether an override is really needed, or whether it's just another attempt by once group with a vested interest to mislead, and that's fair game.
Get off your high horse, and maybe take a Civics class. To speak out against dishonest government, and clearly from the federal level right down through locally, government is not trustworthy, is not only our right, but our duty and responsibility, and I refuse to be victimized any further.
Just look at the history of the superintendent as she has not been transparent over the years . A few years ago a member of the SC resigned and asked for the superintendent’s resignation. Now the SC has a disbarred lawyer and ex convict as its chairman. It should be no mystery why the majority of residents in this community do not trust the information coming from city hall.
"In what universe is that not being critical of higher education?"
Come to think of it, because "higher education institutions" =/= "higher education" unless you assume a synecdoche was intended, which is not necessarily the case. In point of fact, there are many people these days who value higher education but are concerned with institutional groupthink.
Indeed, many people these days across the spectrum are concerned that epistemic closure and information/infotainment bubbles seem to raise the risk of many forms of groupthink.
Well, maybe not Right-Thinking People(TM).
So what someone is trying to say is we can’t be critical of higher education and the fact that THE VAST MAJORITY of college professors are left leaning and the fact that they convey their socialist thinking to impressionable students is irrelevant because we’re paying about $200000 for them to tell us how to think and should appreciate it?
Baloney. This what I said. "Point to one instance where anyone here or citywide has been critical of higher education as a concept. Anyone with even half a brain appreciates the value of higher education."
You replied with the following quote and comment. "their (sic) trying to continue to do what the higher education institutions are doing on the daily, indoctrinate and brainwash them into their way of thinking."
"In what universe is that not being critical of higher education?"
I repeat - no one is being critical of the concept of higher education. What they are criticizing is the crop of people currently running and instructing within educational systems. That's not the same thing at all, and since it can be reasonably concluded that you are not an idiot, it can also be reasonably concluded that you surely know that.
Let's go for a sports metaphor. It's a well known fact that the Yankees suck. Does that therefore mean that the game of baseball sucks?
“Let's go for a sports metaphor. It's a well known fact that the Yankees suck. Does that therefore mean that the game of baseball sucks? ”
Nope. Not even close to the comparison that the original argument is over. That metaphor would have only worked like this - “Let's go for a sports metaphor. It's a well known fact that baseball teams suck. Does that therefore mean that the game of baseball sucks?” (Which is in fact a reasonable conclusion to be drawn that if baseball teams generally suck, the game as a whole probably does too. Just as if someone claims the higher education institutions generally are indoctrinating people, the higher education system as a whole is likely being criticized.) Your strained metaphor akin to someone saying umass Amherst is indoctrinating students and the replying poster going in to defend the higher education system as a whole. Nice try though.
Apparently you too don't understand Not Really's point, that criticizing individual institutions or members of those institutions is not the same thing as criticizing the concept of higher education itself. Your attempt at metaphor doesn't fly either. Even if baseball teams (all? some?) suck, it still doesn't mean the game of baseball sucks. It means that people engaged in it do.
I also don't buy the original complaint that all higher education institutions "indoctrinate". There are certainly members of some institution that do, or attempt to, I'm sure - Berkeley in the 60's and 70's comes to mind - but generally? No. Most institutions are too busy trying to figure out how to survive, and most students are too busy trying to get grades and graduate.
Oh, I understand his point. I also understand that he got called out for a vast generalization that he used as a way to muster up outrage and suddenly became much more specific and measured after it was pointed out.
I think you're a bit confused. It wasn't Not Really who made the original statement about indoctrination. Nor did he/she endorse it. It was someone called Resident or resident. Whichever. You're arguing with the wrong person. Not Really is correct. Criticizing colleges or teachers is not the same thing as condemning the concept of higher education.
They’re both wrong. As are you. The original argument wasn’t about teachers. Again, that’s the point.
Good grief. I give up. You really have no clue do you? Have a nice day.
The Mismanagement lack of Transparency and Coverups. No on any Override.
Melrose has not passed an override in 25 years. What does that matter. That is proof alone that there is no need and never was.
Yes, Dolan came out of the woodwork. But Hammar is never hidden, behind the scenes or out of sight. Sycophant in Chief to all politicians and anyone she thinks might be useful to her. Her agenda is always about Sam 1st. Her “Big Personality” and constant rhetoric is tiring.
Yeah, you're right. How people could fall for such a self-aggrandizing carpetbagging opportunist is a mystery to me.