I Don’t Think “Bias” Means What Glen Casada Thinks It Means

Tennessee Republicans appear to be doing their best to score irony points. Today we have Williamson County Republican Glen Casada, fresh off of wiping his boots with Metro Nashville’s non-discrimination ordinance which protected GLBT and other minority groups from discrimination when the city contracts with private businesses. Casada made sure Nashville’s — and any other city’s — NDO was null and void, so private businesses can continue to discriminate against gays and your tax dollars can continue to pour into such companies. Huzzah.

Today Casada is joining the charge to wipe out perceived “bias” in our state textbooks:

According to Casada, R-Franklin, the question is one of many passages that display bias. Students learn very little about the men who founded the U.S. and what is taught portrays them in a negative light, Casada said. Meanwhile, socialists and foreign “despots” who killed hundreds of their countrymen are praised.

The founders portrayed in a negative light, while socialists are praised? I find this extremely hard to believe. In fact, that defies credibility on all levels. Do show me a history book which only teaches negative things about the founders while praising socialists. I’m dying to see this.

Speaking of portraying people in a negative light, isn’t Glen Casada the one who passed on incorrect information to State Senator Stacey Campfield about Democratic House candidate Roger Byrge? Prompting a libel lawsuit? Why, yes he was:

Campfield maintained in the deposition that he was just repeating information he had received from House Republican Caucus Chairman Glen Casada of Franklin. Casada and the state Republican Party were also sued by Byrge but settled the case to undisclosed terms.

“I did not say those things,” Campfield said in the deposition. “Glen Casada said those things.”

Pressed by Byrge’s attorney, David Dunaway, about whether he was sorry he had published the comments on his blog, Campfield said: “I’m sorry Glen Casada was mistaken in his report, yes.”

Casada said in court filings that he did not intend for Campfield to post the information on the blog before it was confirmed. But Campfield said he didn’t feel a responsibility to verify what he had been told by Casada.

“If you want to say Glen was reckless, I guess you could say that,” Campfield said.

Campfield said he was contacted by Mark Goins, a former Republican state representative from Lafollete, to inform him that the candidate had been confused with somebody else.

Woopsies. I think when it comes to issues of “bias” and “portraying people in a negative light,” the guy who killed Nashville’s non-discrimination ordinance and spread lies about a Democratic candidate to a known loudmouth with a blog ain’t exactly the voice of credibility.

Also? When it comes to education, the people who have confused religious propaganda with sex education are not exactly voices of authority, either.

Anyway, what the hell do you care, Tennessee Republicans? Aren’t you homeschooling all of your kids so they learn about how Adam and Eve had pet dinosaurs and climate change is a liberal hoax?

Please. The very idea that Tennessee Republicans think they know squat about “bias” is hilarious.

About these ads

16 Comments

Filed under education, Tennessee, TNGOP

16 responses to “I Don’t Think “Bias” Means What Glen Casada Thinks It Means

  1. deep

    Well, if you’re talking about the War of Northern Aggression, I suppose Abraham Lincoln would be a foreign despot. Come to think of it, a lot of his views were awfully “socialist” too, even if he died before socialism became a thing.

  2. GregH

    Casada = tool (not much more to say)

  3. Mike

    In reply to “deep” — I’m certainly tired of reading the phrase “the War of Northern Aggression” that is thrown about by southerners. How about we review the undisputed facts. Our Civil War was a War of Southern Aggression as it was the South that chose to start a fight by being the first to fire. The South fired on Fort Sumter, a facility of the United States Federal Government. Yes, it was a War of SOUTHERN Aggression.

    • deep

      Well, being a professional troll myself, I’ve gotten into flame wars with other trolls on this topic before, and there are many southerners which claim that it was the North who started the war because the Tyrant ordered Virginia to send troops to retake Sumter. Forcing one state to attack another state was the “real” aggression here instead of quietly leaving Sumter and going back north. (Never mind the fact that it was Buchanan who first sent troops and supplies before Lincoln took office.)

      • deep

        whoops, I should have said “resupply Sumter” not “retake”.

        Also, the Major in charge of the 1st Artillery relocated 127 men to Sumter without orders from Washington, because he was concerned the SC militia would attack soon.

        So in the end I suppose the question is whether or not SC owned Sumter and had authority to demand that the North evacuate Sumter or face a threat of force.

        As a northerner, I posit that they didn’t, but of course that’ll never convince the modern-day rebels.

    • GregH

      OK, I’ll bite. LOL
      What I am dead dog tired of is Southerners contending the Civil War was about “states rights”. The war was – pure and simple – an attempt to preserve and extend the slavery-based plantation economy of the South, and the economic and political power of Southern planters.
      Mostly, I just people would shut up about the brutal and bloody Civil War. It’s over. It has been over for nearly 150 years. The Union was preserved – and that is a VERY good thing. Please, South, move on.

      • deep

        Well this all started because Beale has some eejit trying to rewrite history in her local school district. I speculated it was over Civil War issues, but who knows, it could be anything in his warped mind.

      • democommie

        It should be, more properly, called “The War of Southern Treachery”. That’s what I call it whenever some shithead neo-clownfederate starts harping on it. Fuck revisionist historians.

  4. GregH

    Deep = professional troll. Who knew!?!? LOL

  5. C B

    Well, hmmmm. If you guys are finished…… Can we go back to the topic of the post? Yes? Thank you!

    “‘Students learn very little about the men who founded the U.S. and what is taught portrays them in a negative light’, Casada said.”

    Really? Perhaps Casada should more appropriately take this issue up with Texas, the bellwether of textbook publishing. Must be their fault.

  6. GregH

    What? Thomas Jefferson had a long term affair with his dead wife’s half-sister, who also happened to be his slave? Franklin liked booze and women and had several illegitimate children? Alexander Hamilton was a faithless husband who had a 3 year long affair with a married woman and paid her con-man husband not to tell? Surely not!
    Oh, on the other hand, Hitler was a swell guy who didn’t drink alcohol, smoke or eat meat and was really nice to his dog.
    There you have it!

  7. Letting Casada have a voice in what our kids are taught is like asking Jim Haslam to investigate the Flying J rebate scandal… One needs to keep foxes out of henhouses, not put them in charge of them.