Diesel
Well-known member
Good grief. Who wrote that disaster on the DOE's letterhead?
Good grief. Who wrote that disaster on the DOE's letterhead?
A MAGA moron. Sad.Good grief. Who wrote that disaster on the DOE's letterhead?
i taught in a large city school system (junior high, middle school, and High school the last 20 years)...Except for deseg, the majority of the students were black...and still are...Very proud neighborhood school...
Made the National News last year...
Just for the record...![]()
Your secretary would have done better then you would have signed it. Let's be real.I disagree, some were stylistic, but others pointed out errors that should NOT occur in a formal letter.
It was a poorly written letter. I would have done much better.
They were also wrong on much of it, from first styling it as a "formal letter" and then in usages. While they may have used systematic, systemic definitely was the better word choice. Systematic means "according to plan", systemic means it is all woven into the system.Whoever did the markup needs to learn how to write. Half of it isn't legible or correct. It looks like the work of a libtard trying to get dumber libtards to believe it. I'm calling bullshit. Where's you're source? Is that it, an X post?? You still haven't figured out you're a moron that needs to be extra careful about proving it with every single post?
This is a typical Lefty post, a hoax that she/he believes immediately regardless of how absurd.They were also wrong on much of it, from first styling it as a "formal letter" and then in usages. While they may have used systematic, systemic definitely was the better word choice. Systematic means "according to plan", systemic means it is all woven into the system.
Now, the HATE thing... If this was a formal letter rather than something they planned to put online for everyone to read I doubt it would have had such emphasis, however this clearly wasn't a "formal letter" it was something written to post online, which is exactly what they did with it. Saying it is a "formal letter" is in itself a bit pretensive.
Since it was a conversational editorial written for online "publication", the usage of the CAPITALISATION emphasis and the "quote marks" for sarcasm are relatively common usages; and if the person didn't understand it wasn't because the "formal letter" wasn't clear it was because they are a bit stupid.
No proof.So Harvard didn't mark up the letter?
A government bureaucrat with an Ivy League education... Any other dumb questions?Good grief. Who wrote that disaster on the DOE's letterhead?
Please, they linked to the original post of the marked up letter from the guy on twitter... It's proof, only someone that thought it was a "formal letter" might think it wasn't.No proof.
I was referring to proof that Harvard did this.Please, they linked to the original post of the marked up letter from the guy on twitter... It's proof, only someone that thought it was a "formal letter" might think it wasn't.
Then why did your post say this?No proof.