Wake County school board candidate Heather Losurdo is responding to the attacks by liberal groups on her and charging that a win by incumbent Kevin Hill could mean the firing of Superintendent Tony Tata.
In a radio ad that Losurdo will be running, she says she's "being subjected to the full mud-slinging treatment by the left" because "the people are on my side with regard to the important questions facing the school board."
Losurdo says a victory by Hill means he'll "have the votes to overturn it (student assignment plan), go back to forced busing and fire Superintendent Tata to boot."
Losurdo made a similar charge about Tata's job being in jeopardy if Hill wins during the tail end of an interview today on the Rick & Donna Martinez Show on WPTF.
Here's the text of the radio ad:
"In a political campaign, you can tell who's losing on the issues by who gets down in the mud, and that's certainly the case in the school board runoff.
Hi, I'm Heather Losurdo and the reason I'm being subjected to the full mud-slinging treatment by the left is pretty obvious. The people are on my side with regard to the important questions facing the school board. I'm strongly in favor of the bipartisan student assignment plan designed by Superintendent Tony Tata and passed with the support of Republicans and Democrats on the board.
My opponent, Kevin Hill, was one of the two votes against it, just as he voted against hiring Superintendent Tata in the first place. The plan ends forced busing and enhances parental choice. But if Hill gets re-elected, he'll have the votes to overturn it, go back to forced busing and fire Superintendent Tata to boot.
Fortunately the solution is easy. Vote for the candidate who supports Superintendent Tata and the bipartisan plan. That's me. Heather Losurdo. Thank you.
Paid for by Friends of Heather Losurdo."
Comments
what a load of BS; Tata
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:09 — xmarkspot62what a load of BS; Tata enjoys broad, bi-partisan support on the Board and throughout the community; Losurdo has no evidence to support her claims; clearly a desperate, "hail Mary" pass by this self-described "Christian" ~ laughable
Tata does indeed enjoy
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 16:41 — woodstockTata does indeed enjoy broad, bipartisn support, however that does not include the left-wing radicals that are directing Hill's campaign.. and Hill himself. His largest contributors -- the Campbells -- made it very clear they support busing for diversity. That is why they got involved and have contributed $60,000.00 and counting. And that does not include the far left-wing and very geneous help Hill is getting from Progress NC and Dean Debnam.
Unsurprisingly, this ad is an outright lie
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 21:52 — WhalerCaneShe was against the plan before she was for it. She says she is for the plan but against balancing schools by student achievement which is part of the plan. The plan will not end 'forced busing', and Kevin Hill is not going to fire Tony Tata.
Simply, she is not remotely qualified to make decisions about our school system that has 146K students, 18K staff, and a 1.5 Billion dollar a year budget.
It is not a lie at all; I am
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:41 — woodstockIt is not a lie at all; rumor has it that many discussions have already taken place in that regard. And Martin, in particular, has already shown his hand by spewing lies to the media about Tata. That kind of irrational behavior kind foreshadows what is to come. Martin's first point of business after the election was to attack Tata with what is now known to be bold-faced lies. If Hill wins and the left-wing storm troopers control the school board, Tata's days are numbered. You KNOW it and so do the voters.
"rumor has it"? that's your
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:41 — xmarkspot62"rumor has it"? that's your proof?? seriously???? do you actually READ your posts before you hit the "post comment" button??
There will be proof soon
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:51 — woodstockThere will be proof soon enough. WhalerCane knows it too.
...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:03 — SideburnsHill might not fire Tata but I'm sure Martin will. And he's got Evans, Kushner and Sutton - who didn't approve of Tata's hiring in the first place - to help him. Hill would just fall in line like he normally does.
If Hill wins, he will work with Martin and Evans to oust Tata.
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 16:57 — woodstockCorrect, if Hill wins the plan will be put into motion. All Hill has to do is vote like he has in the past to support the radical left position.
Please back up your statement with proof...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:44 — valspar...proof that Evans and Kushner did not approve of Tata's hiring. And, why are you sure Martin will? Why would you know something that even Martin may not know or have decided? Does he tell you first? I think not. The blanketness at which you make your statements makes you sound like a gossip, and not credible.
...
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 06:51 — SideburnsThe "who didn't approve of Tata's hiring in the first place" was in regards to Sutton. Remember? He boycotted the meeting and was then interviewed that evening about it while he was out Xmas shopping.
Why would you know something that even Martin may not know or have decided?"
Well, now we know that he is considering it and it's probably being discussed amongst the newbies.
http://www.wral.com/news/education/video/7791021/#/vid7791021
Push forward to 8:25.
Boycotted the meeting
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:39 — Solon77The boycotting of the meeting and voting no was out of principal that the majority was doing what they do best - keep everyone in the dark except for the chosen few and try to push it through as quickly as possible.
As far as getting rid of Tata - there is no evidence of that. Even if one wanted to get rid of him, it wouldn't be an out right just fire the guy. Since Tata reports to the BOE, the BOE would set high performance expectations and if he fell short put more pressure on him until he eventually quit. If he has a problem with the philosophy and direction of the board and could not carry out his duties he could tender his resignation. An outright Donald Trump - you're fired is not going to happen. Just shows how desperate your side is.
...
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 13:38 — SideburnsSince Tata reports to the BOE, the BOE would set high performance expectations and if he fell short put more pressure on him until he eventually quit.
Is that the game plan?
I would hope so
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 13:55 — dseibertShouldn't any BOE expect that their superintendent, whoever he or she is, will perform at a high level in implementing the direction given by the BOE? Why would any district want a low-performing superintendent?
...
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 14:03 — SideburnsAre you suggesting that he hasn't been?
I do wonder what sort of pressure Solon is referring to.
No more rubber stamp
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 18:58 — Solon77No more rubber stamp. Take the leadership academies for example. An excellent idea but not far enough along to commit to spending millions of $. I love the possible collaboration with NC State Shelton Leadership Center. Tedesco should be the first to go through it, still hopeful that a leopard can actually change their spots.
In addition, WCPSS has begun discussions with the General H. Hugh Shelton Leadership Center at North Carolina State University to offer some of its programming to leadership academy students. The Shelton Leadership Center's offerings include value-based leadership skills centered on principles of honesty, integrity, compassion, respect for diversity, and social responsibility. Hands-on leadership opportunities and "360-degree" feedback components would also be integrated.
Martin will not fire Tata
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:11 — WhalerCaneHe has a contract. The only person who is going to fire Tata is Tata. Jim Martin and Tony Tata are grown ups. They will work out thier issues professionally.
Assuming Martin is a grown-up is a mistake
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 16:47 — woodstockAssuming Martin is a grown -up is just another in a long list of false assumptions you have made. He routinely behaves like a spoiled child and there is lots of evidence to prove it.
As for a contract... please, they are broken all the time, and if Hill wins you'll see some very quick and fancy footwork to find fault in Tata's performance.
Are they going to pimp you
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 09:30 — FSandYOUI mean pay you to mediate their situation?
Pay up $
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:19 — starsonoursAre you refering to the professional manner Mr. Martin displayed to Mr. Tata when he was complaining about Ms. Matson? To call that professional would be considered a lie.
Wrong. Neither Mr. Martin
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:26 — WhalerCaneWrong. Neither Mr. Martin or Gen. Tata were exactly professional in the heat of the moment 4 days before the election, but as they move forward, as I stated, they will be professional. That is the likely outcome considering the intelligence of both men, not a wilful lie.
?
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:39 — Bob_SconceHow, exactly, was Tata unprofessional there? Martin's known to be a hot-head, and it was well on display in that exchange.
He should not have responded at all
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:47 — WhalerCaneMartin could have called him a father raper, and the 'Professional' thing for Gen. Tata to do would have been to ignore it.
Let's remember that this was over the Enloe's Key club's web site on a private server being an issue of the use of WCPSS resorces 4 days before the election, but e-mails demonstrating Ron M. used WCPSS resourses for op research were sat on until after the election.
This whole incident was a complete non-issue and they will work our their issues.
LOL Yeah, you are the expert
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 12:49 — woodstockLOL Yeah, you are the expert on professionalism. Too funny. It literally made me laugh out loud... and I can hear the residual laugher from across the county.
Martin's behavior is not a non-issue. It is not a one-time occurance. It is who this man is. He tries to bully people, but Tata will not -- and did not -- stand for it.
The Professional Thing To Do...
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 13:02 — JanisTangowas to give Dr. Martin multiple chances to save face and retract the lies he said about Mr. Tata and his staff. If Dr. Martin refused, then Mr. Tata should stand up for the truth and the incorrect statements made regarding him and his staff.
Oh yeh...that is what Tata did!
Not exactly
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 01:16 — nmoskalI believe the poster was talking about Dr. Martin's accusation that Mr. Tata was unresponsive to his concerns/questions regarding Ms. Matson's campaigning at school events (not the Enloe thing). You will recall Dr. Martin released something that omitted Mr. Tata's immediate response email, making it appear as if Mr. Tata had been unresponsive when in fact he had responded to Dr. Martin immediately (within 45 minutes around midnight by the email time stamps). Mr. Tata apparently gave Dr. Martin the opportunity to correct that public record on that himself, but when Dr. Martin did not Mr. Tata, rightfull,y defended his reputation.
Do you really think that when Dr. Martin did something that publically called Mr. Tata's professionalism into question like that, Mr. Tata should not have defended his reputation and just said thank you sir, may I have another? Really? So the next time someone publically misimplies something about you professionally you are just going to ignore it? I'm pretty sure that you've defended yourself more than once here and that was just against some random bloggers with no real public voice that could truly damage your professional reputation.
The difference
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 19:13 — Solon77When Martin made a complaint it was a "wink wink" I will send an e-mail and remind everyone of the rules. (There, my arse is covered). When Matson files a complaint it is met with swift action, immediate cease and desist and personal engagement.
...
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 20:11 — Sideburnshttp://blogs.newsobserver.com/wakeed/tony-tata-accusing-jim-martin-of-making-inaccurate-statements-about-him
No, Jim Martin purposefully manipulated the email stream to make it look like Tata didn't respond to him in a timely manner when, in fact, he did. It was blatant deceit. And he has still yet to apologize for it.
Reply
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 20:30 — Solon77Tata's reply was an acknowledgement. I would hardly call it an adequate response to the question raised - which came a week later. But why the different treatment ? Matson carrying on for more than a month and when brought to Tata's attention - send an e-mail - looking into it. . Matson files a complaint and it is instant action. The only thing Tata confirmed was different treatment.
From: Anthony Tata/Superintendent/WCPSS
To: "JimMartin" <jimmartin4schools@gmail.com>, "Ann Majestic" <AMajestic@tharringtonsmith.com>, Terri Cobb/Superintendent/WCPSS@Staff
Date: 09/03/2011 12:06 AM
Subject: Re: Campaigning at School Functions
Thank you, Dr. Martin.
Terri, we need to immediately address this broader issue again with principals.
I disagree. Tata behaved appropriately.
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:56 — raleighlauraWhen Martin didn't tell the truth, Tata had a responsibility to his staff to defend their actions.
Flag on the play
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:32 — starsonoursSorry Whaler, you can't be the Referee here, I call for a ruling on this...Is this a lie or not?
It was a lie
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 09:31 — FSandYOUand just the beginning of what those who voted for him are in store for.
Nope...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:36 — Bob_SconceThey're both over 21. By definition, they're grown-ups.
Not age but to say they will
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:40 — starsonoursNot age but to say they will act as professionals when the last interaction (or possibly interactions) was less than professional.
If only Bob
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:39 — WhalerCaneI'm sure I did not become a grown up until after 30. There are people over 60 who do not act like grown ups today.
Well....
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:43 — Bob_SconceYeah yeah yeah... I know what you meant. But,that's not a factual statement, so can't evaluate for lie/not lie.
Uh...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:18 — Bob_SconceYou claim not to lie and then assert Jim Martin is a grown-up?
In any case, you know better than the "he has a contract" line -- the next board could, if it wanted, buy out the rest of Tata's contract.
Sure they could
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:22 — WhalerCaneBut unlike this Board, they will not waist money like that.
How dare she! If she is
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 21:57 — starsonoursHow dare she! If she is lying she should know to leave the lying to professionals like WhalerCane.
I'm hope that makes you feel better.
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:06 — WhalerCaneSticks and Stones.
The truth is I have never lied on this blog, and I will pay you $1000 dollars if you can prove I did. Of course you would have to stand by your words and not be anonymous like many of the cowards on this blog.
I never lied..well on this
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:11 — starsonoursI never lied..well on this blog...I don't want or need you $1000.00 I am sure it still smells like Kevin Hill's wallet...
Is that what you've got?
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:21 — WhalerCaneIs that what you've got? That is a petty and disappointing response. What do you need? $10,000?
I am not anonymous, stand by what I write, and have never lied in my public dialog.
LOL! You never lie and no one in prison is guilty.
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 15:22 — woodstockLOL! You never lie and no one in prison is guilty.
I am sorry I can not accept
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:31 — starsonoursI am sorry I can not accept your money no matter how much you offer...I know were it came from.
...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:10 — SideburnsNotice the qualifier -- "...on this blog".
I cannot say I have never
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:15 — WhalerCaneI cannot say I have never lied in my life, but in regards to school board issues over the past two years, anywhere girlfriend, including that stupid movie where I did go and tell them that Koch's money had not bought the election.
$1000 to you or anyone who can prove I willfully lied.
You claimed you were duped
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 15:10 — woodstockYou claimed you were duped into participating in that stupid video. That in itself is a lie. You are sleazebag, not stupid.
Your soft side is showing Woody
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 16:38 — starsonoursWoody that post could be considered a complisult..a combination of compliment and insult. Is this your softer side getting the better of you?
"Soft?" Damn, that hurts deep inside. LOL
Thu, 11/03/2011 - 16:52 — woodstock"Soft!?" Damn, that hurts deep inside. LOL I am going to have to walk that one off.
Being smart is not an automatic compliment. Ever heard of an evil genius? (FYI: By no means am I suggesting WhalerCane is a genius, but he's not stupid.)
Another qualifier
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:21 — starsonoursAnother qualifier "willfully", you are starting to sound like you have an attorney vetting your comments...
So...
Wed, 11/02/2011 - 22:39 — Bob_SconceI'm going to defend Perry on this one. All likes are willful or, at least, reckless. If you say something that turns out to be false, you're only a liar if you knew it was false when you said it, or, at least, you took a reckless risk that it was false. (And, even then, not always: "I am an eight-foot-tall organutang" is false, but not a lie, since nobody in their right mind believes it.)
Perry has made some predictions here that have turned out to be false (Famously: "Anne McLaurin is running this fall."), and has some utterly bizarre opinion about the best candidate in District 3, but those are not the same thing as lying. I've been paying attention to him, and while he's definitely biased, I've never seen him out-and-out lie.