The Richmond Times Dispatch, “Hate Groups” and Journalism
Share this article
ADVERTISEMENT
(comments below)
Comments
Comments
40 responses to “The Richmond Times Dispatch, “Hate Groups” and Journalism”
-
When I joined the staff of a competing paper in 1972 I found out that the RTD is really known as the Richmond Times Disgrace. At least to some. Back then if course it was its knee-jerk conservative positions, and history of supporting segregation, that engendered disdain. From one extreme to the other….
It really is getting worse. Now Bob Brown is leaving the payroll. I have fewer and fewer reasons to subscribe.
-
Its scary that a hate group like SPLC has assets of $600 million.
For the record, I consider the RTD to be excellent for wrapping fish guts.
-
I still don’t like the term hate group being thrown around. I am sure there are some staffers at the SPLC with egalitarian motives. Just not enough.
It is a bit surprising to me that, since the organization apparently is only dabbling in litigation now, that they continue to get donations at a high level.
-
I still don’t like the term hate group being thrown around.
I understand, but what’s good for the goose is good for the gander, as they say. The SPLC calling ADF a hate group is one of the most egregious examples of the pot calling the kettle black I have run across in a long time.
Whatever the Southern Poverty Law Center may have once been, they have been a sick, disguising joke for at least the last 20 years.
-
They like the ACLU have strayed away from this founding principles and pick and choose which values they wish to defend, instead of defending for all.
-
-
Beg to disagree, regardless of the possibility of some altruistic employees, SPLC is an organization with a long history of hateful conduct.
-
SPLC is an organization that for two decades has exhibited dysfunctional conduct. It has:
– largely withdrawn from the courtroom;
– named those with opposing political views hate groups;
– failed to benefit those they claim to represent; and
– been embroiled in scandal.That is a clear description of the SPLC. No need to call it a hate group. We err when we adopt leftist terminology.
-
-
-
Have you no respect for fish guts?
-
SPLC is one big fat litigation target just begging to be sued
the “hate group” stuff is industrialized defamation
and one day they’re going to apply that label to the wrong people and someone’s going to sue for the whole $600 million and get it
-
I’ll bet you guys are really miffed that two teachers would file suit to establish an unconstitutional right to ignore the direction of parents when it comes to the education of their children….
-
Eric,
As it’s been discussed before Mr. Cross brought suit because he was suspended for using his First Amendment Rights at a school board hearing. Which are the grounds that the Court sided with him on and the settlement of his reinstating.
LCPS based his suspension on their own contentions about actions that never occurred. The VASC ruled in his favor, legally the matter is dead. To continue to bring it up and argue merits that were not part of the case, is pointless.
-
Eric,
As it’s been discussed before Mr. Cross brought suit because he was suspended for using his First Amendment Rights at a school board hearing. Which are the grounds that the Court sided with him on and the settlement of his reinstating.
LCPS based his suspension on their own contentions about actions that never occurred. The VASC ruled in his favor, legally the matter is dead. To continue to bring it up and argue merits that were not part of the case, is pointless.
-
There are two parts to Cross’ suit…
“Other claims will proceed in Cross’s suit, which was amended to seek the transgender policy’s repeal. Alliance Defending Freedom, which represents Cross, sought a temporary injunction to prevent enforcement of the policy. The judge didn’t rule Monday, but indicated that he might rule between Thanksgiving and Christmas.”
-
The second part of Cross’s suit wasn’t before the court and he is not the only party.
-
I agree but it is an active case now and it is the suit I am referring to above. It is pretty clear he should have the right to public comment. I still feel like there should be ramifications to threatening your boss publicly that you will not follow a duly enacted policy but the courts either did not consider that or disagreed. Fair enough but the remaining suit is something different.
The courts may still side with the teachers but my larger point still stands… protected speech or not, the teacher’s position is that they do not have to follow the requests of parents if they disagree which is exactly counter to the recent positions of players like the Virginia Project (which is who my comment is directed to). The difference here is the parents being overridden here have trans kids – I see no other factor at work.
-
If LCPS had not abridged Mr. Cross’s 1st Amendment rights this suit probably wouldn’t even be considered. They opened themselves up to further litigation in doing that. I don’t agree he threatened anyone, he made statements which were within his right as a father and a member of community.
Is 8040 a result of a SB voted upon measure where the public was engaged or was it just a policy adopted through LCPS?
I don’t know what Virginia Project has stated, but they don’t speak for me.
My only concern is that individuals rights are not violated within the confines of the Constitution and all measures enacting policy’s like 8040 get a public vote that way all parties have stake.
-
I believe they took public comment on 8040… that is where Cross stated he as a teacher would not follow such a policy if it was adopted. I concede this was still found to be within his rights.
My comment above (that you responded to) was directed to Virginia Project. Their position is well published when it comes to parents having the final say on every aspect of their child’s education.
-
I appreciate that you’re seeing that he was within his right and was unfairly targeted for those statements in the eyes of the Law.
Also, thanks for the clarification on your comment. Ultimately parents do have the final say in a child’s education, they either entrust a public institutions where they’ve had input in the school board and have a method of redress if they see anything that disturbs (within reason) them or they can opt to pay for private school. I think the former has been shown as a façade in some cases over the last year, where SB’s are acting in their own interests and will silence those whom which don’t agree.
Beyond the 8040 policy that is outlined in the book “Race to the Bottom” which has ties to Virginia.
-
-
-
-
I had an old colleague use the ADF one time. They seem to know how to get things done.
What is insane is the inconsistency on how we address the mental and emotional capacity of minors. If we believe that because of the state of a person’s mental and emotional development, we don’t permit the death penalty to be imposed on anyone under 18 or even a mandatory life sentence without parole, why do we think a person under 18 can make permanent decisions about “changing” their gender? Is it unreasonable for parents to choose what books their children should be exposed to in school? Shouldn’t there be some level of consistency?
-
The whole “person under 18” thing is a movement that seeks, relishes really, gratification or validation or both by the mutilation of children.
The insistence of adults on their right not to wait until children reach adulthood for this mutilation is perhaps the most profound evil in America today.
-
Using a different pronoun is hardly “mutilation”.
-
Nice try. My comment is about “gender transition” in kids.
-
“High school French teacher Peter Vlaming was fired from his job in West Point, Virginia for declining to refer to a female student with male pronouns…”
-
-
-
-
The suits wish to give these teachers the right to override the direction of trans kids’ parents and their doctors (who I assume are over 18)…
-
You lost me at “trans kids”.
-
“Lesser humans” then…??
-
There is a reason we protect children with laws. They are unable to protect themselves.
You may believe that children as young as six understand their sexuality as the “model policies” stated. You may believe they are competent to make choices. I do not.
You are clearly comfortable with adults making decisions for children about their sexuality and intervening medically to change it. I am not. Under any circumstances.
You are welcome to your opinion. I am done with you.
-
I do not believe that anyone is surgically altering six year olds.
You are comfortable with teachers making decisions for children and ignoring their parents instructions regarding their sexuality.
As far as intervening medically, I don’t believe teachers have any say in that at all. Any surgery would require parental consent. Do you think parents have no say in this as well? You prefer the state….
-
-
-
When I joined the staff of a competing paper in 1972 I found out that the RTD is really known as the Richmond Times Disgrace. At least to some. Back then if course it was its knee-jerk conservative positions, and history of supporting segregation, that engendered disdain. From one extreme to the other….
It really is getting worse. Now Bob Brown is leaving the payroll. I have fewer and fewer reasons to subscribe.
The ADF is quite out front and vocal about its Christian viewpoint (see website), so I’m not sure that adjective was unfairly used. I’ve always been amused by SPLC’s hunt for hate groups, given its deep animosity for anyone who disagrees with it.
Four sessions back, my last one as a contract lobbyist (this story is why), I was retained by the Virginia Poverty Law Center. But my friends at the dominant utility happily told every legislator who would listen I worked for SPLC. VPLC shares a similar name, and it’s hardly right-wing, but it is NOT affiliated with the SPLC. Republicans who had been my friends were yelling at me about it in hallways, and business groups said I had a client who sued them. No, that is SPLC….but the damage to my reputation and earnings ability were done. It was fine. It was time to move on.
-
“Christian” was not unfairly used, but it was unnecessary to the story and unfortunately it is a dog whistle these days nonetheless.
I am sorry to read about your experience in that tar pit.
Unfortunately, the fact that some GA legislators did not understand the difference between VPLC and SPLC does not surprise me. Nor the fact that many failed to question the rumor.
-
Oh, c’mon. They all have nicks, the Virginian Pileup, Daily Mess, etc.
Nothing is ever lost…
https://media.npr.org/assets/img/2022/03/09/endurance-found-2-3-c9dbb15c0cbace9542e6b7369f78bf7ccaaedf83-s1800-c85.jpg -
Sorry about your denouement. Perceptions can be amazingly persuasive while being amazingly wrong. But you knew that.
Long ago when I moved to Richmond (yeah, I’ll always be a “come here”) the companion paper to the Times Disgrace was the News Loser. Monument Avenue was aka Losers Row and The Village was the spot. The News Loser in those long gone days was still mourning massive resistance in the afternoons.
Sounds as if Hanover County might be a good place to buy property, establish a business and raise a family. While downtown Richmond, on the other hand, appears to be a good place to set up a hookah lounge or go on welfare.
Rtd has become an intellectually lazy, untalented company
Hate Groups and Journalism?
They’re not the same? Like apples and Granny Smith’s.
“some call a ‘hate group’”
Well, “some” people DO call the ADF a “hate group.” And “some” people think that Jews in black helicopters run America.
ADF should insist that the RTD run an opinion piece written by ADF, which explains their side of the issue. I’m confident ADF will knock it out of the park, and its detractors will look—to “most” people—small by comparison.
If the RTD is willing to allow cues from “some” people to influence the stories it covers—and, more to the point, pursues—then that will reflect poorly on the RTD. If the RTD wants to become a progressive paper, it can. And, in so doing, I think they’ll make themselves less relevant in a society that isn’t really that progressive at all.
So we have now a gym teacher and a french teacher who are supported by Conservatives (Christian hate groups or not) who suddenly believe their rights to their own ideology trump the rights of the student’s parents when it comes to the education of the child (well, only the trans kids, of course). Where is Ian Prior now…??
-
You remember that one of the primary objections to the Virginia Board of Education’s Model Policies was that it encouraged school employees not to notify parents, don’t you?
-
To which Ian, et al screamed “Parent’s Rights!!… unless your kid is trans, of course then screw you!!”
-
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.