WE POSE WIGHTMAN'S POINT ABOUT REWRITING THE HISTORY OF SLAVERY IN SCHOOL TEXTBOOKS TO SBOE CANDIDATE TAD HASSE

Jim Barton,  Publisher of
the Brownsville Observer

From the editor:  If you consider having a passion for education a prerequisite to serving on the State Board of Education, longtime Brownsville resident Tad Hasse is an obvious choice to serve on that board.

While his opponent in the Republican Primary, Eric Garza, has difficulty formulating a coherent sentence, leaves questions on voter questionnaires blank(notably, one on abortion),  Hasse dodges no questions, always gets into the intricacies of what makes things work and how they could work better.

Certainly, department heads within the City of Brownsville view Hasse as the ultimate problem solver in his role as I-Tech Manager.  Just ask them!

Yes, Hasse has conservative views.  He's a member of the Republican Party.  But, it would be a mistake to think that Hasse is in lockstep with EVERYTHING proposed or promoted by party members.

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes, publisher of the BROWNSVILLE VOICE, stated this view of Hasse's candidacy, suggesting he "renounce" viewpoints expressed by others in his party.

Note Mr. Wightman's words:

Bobby Wightman-Cervantes, Publisher
of the BROWNSVILLE VOICE

For the Republican primary it is sound to endorse Tad Hasse because the SBOE does need a math expert. No personality needed to decide this issue. This is a fact of substance.

But in the November election, Hasse is wrong unless he denounces the Republicans on the SBOE. We do not need another Republican who wants to change the term slave to guest worker., or limit teaching about Thomas Jefferson.

Yes, having a SBOE math expert would be great. But is it also essential to our children's education to insure we have strong Democrats on the SBOE to challenge the ignorant changes the Republicans want to put into our textbooks.

Ed:  I wanted Tad to personally respond to the issue raised by Mr. Wightman, so I inboxed this question:  

"Can you give me a quote about 'slaves' vs 'indentured servants' to reflect your position on history book wording?"

Minutes later, Hasse gave this response:

"There is a difference, however indentured servitude refers to a Colonial British system that worked like Aaron's Furniture, for people who were white. Slavery was a system where people were bought and sold outright like cattle. Slaves sold, mostly by Dutch companies to the American markets were Black, as the idea of a white person being a slave was impossible to fathom. Muslim countries made no special distinction as to race, but preferred white slaves, and do to this day.

As I have said publicly at many forums:

History is as it was written. It was the experience of the authors at the time and we have no right to judge or alter the validity of their experience. If there were two sides at the time, show both, but we will never learn from the good or bad that happened in the past by modifying in any way the expression of the experience of those that were there when it happened."

Ed:  As Hasse explained, he does not support sanitizing the words "slave" or "slavery" in history textbooks.  

Once on the SBOE, Hasse will argue his position articulately, forcefully.  That's how he rolls.