DeSantis and his stupid laws

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

3 minutes ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

I’m good with or. Leftists are strict constitutionalists when it suits them. It’s an outdated relic when it doesn’t.  But you probably think I’m making a 2a argument. Which I am not. 

I think both sides are only strict constructionists when it suits them. How’s that? 

[RLLD 3,455]

2 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I am not sure where you are getting this.   

Book bans = dumb   

Fighting against book bans = good.   

 

I don't care which side of the aisle is doing which in order to tell you I am against #1, but it seems currently the right is hellbent on doing #1.  

Do you also object to the banning of the books in California, I think you and I agree that this banning is not suitable, so we are together with that as well I presume?

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

6 minutes ago, EternalShinyAndChrome said:

The American Left is pushing us towards Socialism/Marxism/Communism - basically a totalitarian lefty regime aka "The New Bolsheviks", 

If you truly believe this is true then it justifies most of your other political positions. But personally I believe this is a skewed perspective, far removed from reality. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

Just now, RLLD said:

Do you also object to the banning of the books in California, I think you and I agree that this banning is not suitable, so we are together with that as well I presume?

Can you be more specific? I live in California and I’m not aware of what you’re referring to. 

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Can you be more specific? I live in California and I’m not aware of what you’re referring to. 

Source

[BuckSwope 654]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

Do you also object to the banning of the books in California, I think you and I agree that this banning is not suitable, so we are together with that as well I presume?

I am not sure the example you are referring to, but I am guessing it will be yes, I object to that too.   

Like I said before, I hate the left side of these tactics too - on campuses, blocking speakers, etc..   Both sides have banned things like books, but it currently seems far more common on the right as they are on their crusade to weed out anything with "sexual content" in it.  

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, BuckSwope said:

I am not sure the example you are referring to, but I am guessing it will be yes, I object to that too.   

Like I said before, I hate the left side of these tactics too - on campuses, blocking speakers, etc..   Both sides have banned things like books, but it currently seems far more common on the right as they are on their crusade to weed out anything with "sexual content" in it.  

I enjoy finding common ground with people, so thanks. 

It's more fun to accentuate what brings us together, than what divides us. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

Source

Thanks. I was unaware that anyone tried to ban Mockingbird, that’s terrible. Banning Harry Potter is awful too, though a distinction needs to be made, always between government actions and private actions. 
 

But if your argument is that liberals and leftists also promote censorship from time to time, and it’s just as awful when they do it as when conservatives do it, and that, just as in so many other cases, hypocrisy runs amok on all sides, you won’t get any disagreement from me. 

[BuckSwope 654]

2 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I enjoy finding common ground with people, so thanks. 

It's more fun to accentuate what brings us together, than what divides us. 

I know people don't seem to believe me, but we will agree on stuff like this, trans, woke, guns, etc.. way more than we disagree.   

I just don't participate in the labeling people who vote a certain was as stupid, racist, retarded, groomers, etc..  so it comes off largely as defending one side or the other as I push back on that toxic b.s.  

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Thanks. I was unaware that anyone tried to ban Mockingbird, that’s terrible. Banning Harry Potter is awful too, though a distinction needs to be made, always between government actions and private actions. 
 

But if your argument is that liberals and leftists also promote censorship from time to time, and it’s just as awful when they do it as when conservatives do it, and that, just as in so many other cases, hypocrisy runs amok on all sides, you won’t get any disagreement from me. 

I am glad we can find common ground here.

I think there should be access to the materials and banning is not in our best interests.

I think access could be controlled based on age, but by the time these kids are in high school we really want them to have full and unfettered access to materials.  This topic, for me, is separate from curriculum

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

14 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I am not sure where you are getting this.   

Book bans = dumb   

Fighting against book bans = good.   

 

I don't care which side of the aisle is doing which in order to tell you I am against #1, but it seems currently the right is hellbent on doing #1.  

The books aren’t being banned, stop saying that. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

14 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I think both sides are only strict constructionists when it suits them. How’s that? 

I am. So long as the 10th amendment is adhered to. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

I am glad we can find common ground here.

I think there should be access to the materials and banning is not in our best interests.

I think access could be controlled based on age, but by the time these kids are in high school we really want them to have full and unfettered access to materials.  This topic, for me, is separate from curriculum

Is it separate from reading list? Much of the material that Florida objected to was not part of the required reading material, but more of a voluntary list of authors that the students would be exposed to. 

[RLLD 3,455]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Is it separate from reading list? Much of the material that Florida objected to was not part of the required reading material, but more of a voluntary list of authors that the students would be exposed to. 

I think the books should be available, but not necessarily mandatory.

The curriculum should be focused on the defined intent of the course, without additional elements embedded. This is more subjective perhaps.  What if instead of mandatory, the books were listed as recommended reading?

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

1 minute ago, RLLD said:

I think the books should be available, but not necessarily mandatory.

The curriculum should be focused on the defined intent of the course, without additional elements embedded. This is more subjective perhaps.  What if instead of mandatory, the books were listed as recommended reading?

I think that’s what they are, especially in the revised curriculum. Let’s see if Florida accepts it. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

3 minutes ago, RLLD said:

I think the books should be available, but not necessarily mandatory.

The curriculum should be focused on the defined intent of the course, without additional elements embedded. This is more subjective perhaps.  What if instead of mandatory, the books were listed as recommended reading?

In like 97% of the cases with book bannings the books are not mandatory and not part of the curriculum. They are in the library but not forced on kids. In some cases they might be and on those I would agree I don't think that is best practice. But it's also important to remember a teacher does not create a curriculum in a vacuum. They write a course, they present it, the public sees it, the school board votes on it. Essentially it goes through like 3 or 4 different check points. 

Some of those books are on lists that get passed around to attack. As I said before, one of the recent books that caused problems for people was not even in our physical library- it was a digital text that a student needed to get a password to access. Like how far are we supposed to go?

[RLLD 3,455]

5 minutes ago, Sean Mooney said:

In like 97% of the cases with book bannings the books are not mandatory and not part of the curriculum. They are in the library but not forced on kids. In some cases they might be and on those I would agree I don't think that is best practice. But it's also important to remember a teacher does not create a curriculum in a vacuum. They write a course, they present it, the public sees it, the school board votes on it. Essentially it goes through like 3 or 4 different check points. 

Some of those books are on lists that get passed around to attack. As I said before, one of the recent books that caused problems for people was not even in our physical library- it was a digital text that a student needed to get a password to access. Like how far are we supposed to go?

It can be complicated.  Part of me thinks that the parents should be more involved where curriculum is being developed, but that could be a can of worms. 

Then I think back to when education, prior to college, focused on how to learn and basic concepts....and then college was where the depth of exploration arose and where social issues were engaged.  This was a good setup, kids were engaging these topics at a nice place in their development.

Social media seems to have allowed these topics to reach them at a younger age, and education is reacting to that.  Rather than allow social media to govern what and how they learn about these complex topics, the schools are trying to get in there....probably a good idea.

But the problem is that some of these ideas are really just opinions, without actual backing and now there seems to be some movement to pretend opinion is truth, i think that is where things are getting testy. 

[EternalShinyAndChrome 2,521]

32 minutes ago, BuckSwope said:

I know people don't seem to believe me, but we will agree on stuff like this, trans, woke, guns, etc.. way more than we disagree.   

I just don't participate in the labeling people who vote a certain was as stupid, racist, retarded, groomers, etc..  so it comes off largely as defending one side or the other as I push back on that toxic b.s.  

I tried to like your post but for some reason it says I can't like posts anymore today. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

30 minutes ago, RLLD said:

It can be complicated.  Part of me thinks that the parents should be more involved where curriculum is being developed, but that could be a can of worms. 

Then I think back to when education, prior to college, focused on how to learn and basic concepts....and then college was where the depth of exploration arose and where social issues were engaged.  This was a good setup, kids were engaging these topics at a nice place in their development.

Social media seems to have allowed these topics to reach them at a younger age, and education is reacting to that.  Rather than allow social media to govern what and how they learn about these complex topics, the schools are trying to get in there....probably a good idea.

But the problem is that some of these ideas are really just opinions, without actual backing and now there seems to be some movement to pretend opinion is truth, i think that is where things are getting testy. 

The social media thing should not be overlooked and it's a salient point to make. Kids at a young age know about way more than we did at that age because it is more prevalent and they are able to find it more. Additionally, kids are able to access these things because parents allow them to. My daughter is in 5th grade and she has multiple kids in her class with cell phones. It's baffling at this point. 

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

Kids in Baltimore and other cities aren’t even close to reading at grade level.  How about that becomes the cause, and not this junk? 

[jonmx 1,593]

4 hours ago, Fnord said:

Good Christ. I can turn every statement you just made against the left back onto the right and support it with actual current events, versus using click-bait, far-right media sky screamers' opinions as truth. You're a hoot Jon.

Can you point out to me where a democratic-led government is using its power to determine what the public can and can't read? Without using some website that conflates cancel culture,  CRT, 1619, transgenderism, and every other conservative trigger word into a useless jumble of partisan outrage?

No. You can't. 

Yes, I can point exactly where it is at.  The government require certain certifications for teachers.  These are run through our mostly government universities. 

And those are not trigger words.   Those legal theories get backed into every teacher's education course work and through all the continuing education programs.   The problem is these critical decisions which shape what happens in every classrooms across the country are all made outside the purview of our elected government. 

Now you bastards, then get upset when these backroom processes are exposed for having a radical leftist agenda.   As soon as parents start to have some say in the crap that goes on, that is when you get upset.  Authoritarian elitists want control of education to be done deep in the depths of unelected bureaucrats outside of any input from elected representatives and parents.  I hate Authoritarian ideology form either side with a passion.  It is the formula for every evil government ever in existences.  And it is a complete canard to equate that to parents having say over what books are being offered to their children.  Everything you say is a total bag of shite.  

  

[BuckSwope 654]

1 hour ago, RLLD said:

It can be complicated.  Part of me thinks that the parents should be more involved where curriculum is being developed, but that could be a can of worms. 

Then I think back to when education, prior to college, focused on how to learn and basic concepts....and then college was where the depth of exploration arose and where social issues were engaged.  This was a good setup, kids were engaging these topics at a nice place in their development.

Social media seems to have allowed these topics to reach them at a younger age, and education is reacting to that.  Rather than allow social media to govern what and how they learn about these complex topics, the schools are trying to get in there....probably a good idea.

But the problem is that some of these ideas are really just opinions, without actual backing and now there seems to be some movement to pretend opinion is truth, i think that is where things are getting testy. 

Good posts in here, and I really hadn't thought much about the bolded but that is a great point.   I am sure teachers are getting peppered with questions about that stuff, and could very see the reaction to this as saying they need to be trained on it and it might as well be addressed in class.   

[BuckSwope 654]

2 hours ago, RLLD said:

I am glad we can find common ground here.

I think there should be access to the materials and banning is not in our best interests.

I think access could be controlled based on age, but by the time these kids are in high school we really want them to have full and unfettered access to materials.  This topic, for me, is separate from curriculum

Agree 1000% here.   

Another thing I keep circling back to, especially when it comes to schools, is that IMO we way underestimate just how much of a "catch all" we have allowed our schools to become.  And we still frustratingly underfund them.   What I mean by that is it should be clear after what we saw during covid and shutdowns, just how important school is for way too many kids as far as food, counseling, access to materials, internet, etc..      Banning a book from a library is banning it for many kids.  

It frustrates me when I see people (rightfully) getting this when we are worried about people suffering during inflation, but they seems to miss this important point when talking about kids and schools.   I don't get it. 

[craftsman 1,045]

1 hour ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Kids in Baltimore and other cities aren’t even close to reading at grade level.  How about that becomes the cause, and not this junk? 

 They need to learn lies about black people first. Then about what sex they want to be by the time they are 6 years old. Then maybe reading much later. Unless they think they can be in professional sports one day. Then no need to teach them anything.

[jonmx 1,593]

Hulu built a six part mini series around the 1619 Project claim that “nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery.”   No agenda here folks.   I am sure this piece of shiet miniseries won't end up in classrooms.   The 1619 Project is just a figment of the rights imagination.   No one takes that looney view of history serious.  

The government brainwashing of stupid people continues.   But let's make a big deal about people not wanting the book, "Heather has a Big PeeWee" in the library being read by some overweight hairy guy wearing panties and a short dress.  Let's distract from the real issues which are destroying our Public Schools. 

  

 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

4 minutes ago, jonmx said:

Hulu built a six part mini series around the 1619 Project claim that “nearly everything that has made America exceptional grew out of slavery.”   No agenda here folks.   I am sure this piece of shiet miniseries won't end up in classrooms.   The 1619 Project is just a figment of the rights imagination.   No one takes that looney view of history serious.  

The government brainwashing of stupid people continues.   But let's make a big deal about people not wanting the book, "Heather has a Big PeeWee" in the library being read by some overweight hairy guy wearing panties and a short dress

  

 

Have you watched the show yet? It’s excellent. 

[jonmx 1,593]

Just now, The Real timschochet said:

Have you watched the show yet? It’s excellent. 

I am sure it is excellently produced and well made because it has big money backing it.  But I am also sure a critical look at it will prove that it is a pile of manure in being an accurate portrayal of history.  But you eat that crap up, because you love the big state agenda.  

[Hardcore troubadour 12,656]

On 1/25/2023 at 7:18 AM, The Real timschochet said:

And apparently being a lefty these days means you want for white people what the Nazis wanted for the Jews. I can’t believe anyone would actually write that, much less believe it…yet here we are. 

Here’s Tim making a Nazi correlation. 

[craftsman 1,045]

On 2/2/2023 at 8:05 PM, jonmx said:

I am sure it is excellently produced and well made because it has big money backing it.  But I am also sure a critical look at it will prove that it is a pile of manure in being an accurate portrayal of history.  But you eat that crap up, because you love the big state agenda.  

Pretty spot on. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

10 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Here’s Tim making a Nazi correlation. 

Are you serious with this? I was responding to Jon’s crazy assertions which he’s now made in two different threads. Do you even read stuff before you post? 

[Voltaire 4,562]

14 hours ago, Hardcore troubadour said:

Here’s Tim making a Nazi correlation. 

Tim was responding to Jon who'd compared the excesses of the authoritarian left to Nazi Germany. 

[Sean Mooney 1,184]

5 hours ago, The Real timschochet said:

Are you serious with this? I was responding to Jon’s crazy assertions which he’s now made in two different threads. Do you even read stuff before you post? 

He doesn't. His reading skills are pretty terrible

[craftsman 1,045]

2 hours ago, Sean Mooney said:

He doesn't. His reading skills are pretty terrible

Did your favorite Starbucks get your pumpkin foam latte right this morning? 

[Mike Hunt 154]

On 1/26/2023 at 5:41 PM, The Real timschochet said:

There is no contradiction between your first two statements. It’s true, and wonderful, that immigrants come here from all over the world and achieve success. Thats a big part of what makes this country the greatest in the history of civilization. 
At the same time, we have always had, and continue to have, serious inequities with regard to African-Americans, which are mostly a result of racism, and that is absolutely baked into our system. Black Americans, unlike most other immigrant groups, did not come here willingly for the most part; their ancestors were brought here in chains. That’s a very significant difference between them and those of us whose great grandparents arrived on Ellis Island, for example. 

 

Every person in the USA wishes that slaves were not sold into slavery to the states.   This country would be so much better off now if the blacks came as immigrants only.  There would be a very small population of blacks and the country would be so much happier and safer than today.

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

6 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

 

Every person in the USA wishes that slaves were not sold into slavery to the states.   This country would be so much better off now if the blacks came as immigrants only.  There would be a very small population of blacks and the country would be so much happier and safer than today.

What a very odd thing to write. I would certainly not be happier with a smaller black population. Why would you be? 

[Mike Hunt 154]

7 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

What a very odd thing to write. I would certainly not be happier with a smaller black population. Why would you be? 

It is not about if you are happier. 

It is about the black population being happier and thriving like all other cultures that came here. Cities with less violence and safer for all. 

[The Real timschochet 2,943]

5 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

It is not about if you are happier. 

It is about the black population being happier and thriving like all other cultures that came here. Cities with less violence and safer for all. 

I don’t think most black people would tell you they would be happier if there were less of them here. 

[Mike Hunt 154]

4 minutes ago, The Real timschochet said:

I don’t think most black people would tell you they would be happier if there were less of them here. 

It is not about that.   If blacks immigrated here in say the 50s and 60s they would be just like other cultures that have success here no matter what the numbers are.

[jerryskids 5,206]

14 minutes ago, Mike Hunt said:

It is not about that.   If blacks immigrated here in say the 50s and 60s they would be just like other cultures that have success here no matter what the numbers are.

He's just being obtuse; he knows what you are saying but doesn't have a good response.   

[TBayXXXVII 2,117]

I don't know this, I only think this... but my guess is that if black people were never brought over here as slaves, our black population would be around 1%... maybe less.