Why Would a Trustee Lie to Us?

Fact-checking Joyce Foreman's statements on the 2015 DISD bond

pinocchio

If you’ve read any articles about the proposed bond program on the ballot this November, you have undoubtedly read a quote or two from School Board Trustee Joyce Foreman. She has been very vocal in her opposition to the bond, and she always gets quoted. This is because the media want to “cover both sides” of the issue, and she is the most vocal opponent of the DISD bond.

Actually, that’s not accurate: Joyce Foreman is the ONLY vocal opponent to the DISD bond, at least among elected officials in Dallas.

Why? I think it’s because she’s lying about crucial facts about the bond. Read my full fact-check of her statements here.

Comments

  • Retiredteacher1

    Eric, you loosely throw around the term “lie,” when all you are doing is continuing the defamation of the AA female trustees. This time you’ve abandoned your attack on Nutall to shift to Foreman. Your misogynism continues to shine like a beacon, shutting out any reason you might have displayed.

    You seem to have only two ways to express yourself:

    1) Glowing verbiage for all things “deform” (home rule, dictatorial governance, TFA, dumbed down teaching strategies) and the local people associated with it: Mike Miles, Mike Rawlings, Mile Morath, Todd Williams, and Ken Barth.

    2) Egregious, vitriolic verbiage for all those who oppose the destruction of public education in Dallas: Teachers, Betnadette Nutall, Joyce Foreman, Bill Betzen, etc., etc.

    You write specious articles that defame those who oppose your the story your “handlers” are attempting to sell to the publlic. Now you have accused a trustee, Joyce Foreman, of lying, with you as judge and jury. And what are your educational qualifications?

    1) You attended school and produced a daughtwr who attended school.
    2) You write part-time for several publications: Amercan Way and D Magazine.

    The above experience exposes you as woefully unprepared to write about education, a subject about which there seem to be no credentials required.

    In short, you are either a paid shill who writes what your “handlers” tell you to write, or you are the most gullible fool in Dallas. You can choose either description you think applies. I’m torn between the two definitions, as they both seem to describe you perfectly.

    Should I add “LIAR” to the choices? Perhaps, but I’ll let the two choices stand.

    In the LYING words of your handlers:

    “For the children”
    “I’m just interested in helping kids.”
    “I’m interested in “good governance.”
    “Public education is the civil rights issue of our time.”
    “For the scholars.”
    “AA trustees are loud people speaking to other loud people.”