# My high school textbook seems politically biased and factually incorrect.



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.

Here's one quote from it:

"Some of today's immigrants to the United States and Canada are poor people pushed from their homes by economic desperation, but most are young, well educated people lured to economically growing countries."

I don't think this is true.   With the millions and millions of uneducated people a year we're receiving from Latin America, I don't see how it can be.

Also, here's a paragraph that attempts to briefly describe the motives of the 9/11 terrorists, linking it to opposition of globalization:

"A much more extreme opposition to globalization led to the attack by al-Qaeda terrorists against the United States on September 11, 2001, with support of the Taliban then in control of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda selected targets- the World Trade Center and the Pentagon-they considered especially visible symbols of US domination of globalization trends in culture, politics, and economy. Afghanistan's Taliban leaders justified such actions as banning television and restricting women's activities as consistent with local traditions, and such punishments as public floggings and severing of limbs as a necessary counterbalance to strong forces of globalization."

Okay, there's nothing factually wrong here, I just think it left out a very important detail.   It didn't mention the Taliban's and al-Qaedas religious beliefs, which are a very important detail to include because they pretty much control they're behavior.   They  don't restrict women's activities to stay consistent with "local traditions", as my textbook claims, they do it because of they're radical beliefs!

Here's what I thought was a big signal of bias.  It's relating to illegal immigration:

"Hostile citizens in California and other states have voted to deny undocumented immigrants access to most public services, such as schools, day-care centers, and health clinics. The laws have been difficult to enforce and of dubious constitutionality, but their enactment reflects on the unwillingness of many Americans to help out needy immigrants."

I think the bias here is pretty obvious.  It calls the citizens who vote not to allow illegals the right to use public services "hostile", for one.  It also puts a very negative light on people with those views by essentially calling them unwilling to help out all immigrants, not just illegal ones.

So, after reading through these, do you agree with me that my textbook is biased?  These are just some of the examples of bias, by the way, and there are many others.  I'm going to look for the textbook for more as I know they're in there and I might post again on this same subject.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

Well,, the immigration statement is a sweeping generalization. If you really want to know, find as many statistical analysis' as you can and see where the statement might be blatantly oversimplified.

Al Qaeda is a CIA proxy built during the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They don't like us because we encroach on both their lands, and their economic/cultural status. Both militarily and diplomatically. But ultimately, they are the product of the our own making.

The rest is pure BS.


----------



## jillian (Nov 17, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..



you are neither smart enough nor knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on what is 'biased'.

the text book isn't biased. you are.

and you should be sent to your room without supper.

now go study and learn something.

my son is a sophmore in a public high school and i'd whup him if he sounded as silly as you.

(although i do applaud your being political... even if you're still ignorant).


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...



Says the "grown-up" that obviously failed history, math and economics.

You should probably not be giving advice on "who isn't smart enough" to do anything, Ogre.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...



Okay...I'm not sure whether to be offended or think that you actually agree with me that they're is bias going on here.  Tell me, specifically why am I wrong about these parts of my textbook being biased and incorrect?


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

Dont listen to her, kid. Just keep digging. Never stop questioning everything.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 17, 2012)

Wait until you get to the part about the "Greatness" of FDR, it's hysterical!


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

Or Lincoln. Or Wilson. Or......

The history, social/economics and US foreign policy information you get in public school is one giant cheer for statism.


----------



## jillian (Nov 17, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Wait until you get to the part about the "Greatness" of FDR, it's hysterical!



only to people who live in an alternate reality, frank.


----------



## jillian (Nov 17, 2012)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Dont listen to her, kid. Just keep digging. Never stop questioning everything.



no. he SHOULD listen to me. 

we can have a myriad of different opinions.

there is only one set of facts.

don't encourage ignorance.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Wait until you get to the part about the "Greatness" of FDR, it's hysterical!
> ...



Tell us again how FDR paid down the debt, jillian.


----------



## jillian (Nov 17, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



because facts are facts.

you can draw whatever opinion you want to about those facts, but there can't be alternative facts.

capice.

i'd hope they're biased in favor of the truth. you should be biased in favor of facts, too.

i'm not trying to insult you. i'm pointing out that the idea that the textbooks are 'biased' is silly. 

and facts don't always suit our political views.

or do you want to do the whole texas: let's make up our own history thing?

read.

learn.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

Personally, I'd rather listen to a toilet flush than take any advice from the Ogre. YMMV


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 17, 2012)

> _"Some of today's immigrants to the United States and Canada are poor people pushed from their homes by economic desperation, but most are young, well educated people lured to economically growing countries."_
> 
> I don't think this is true. With the millions and millions of uneducated people a year we're receiving from Latin America, I don't see how it can be.



Youre confusing legal with illegal immigration. 



> Here's what I thought was a big signal of bias. It's relating to illegal immigration:
> 
> _"Hostile citizens in California and other states have voted to deny undocumented immigrants access to most public services, such as schools, day-care centers, and health clinics. The laws have been difficult to enforce and of dubious constitutionality, but their enactment reflects on the unwillingness of many Americans to help out needy immigrants."_
> 
> I think the bias here is pretty obvious. It calls the citizens who vote not to allow illegals the right to use public services "hostile", for one. It also puts a very negative light on people with those views by essentially calling them unwilling to help out all immigrants, not just illegal ones.



Theres nothing bias about it, just a statement of fact. The 14th Amendment affords all persons in the United States equal protection and due process rights, regardless immigration status, or lack thereof. See: _Plyler v. Doe_ (1982). 

To deny allegedly undocumented immigrants access to most public services, for example, simply because of their immigration status, is a violation of the Equal Protection Clause. There are also potential due process violations as well. 

From what youve posted your textbook is both accurate and un-biased.


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Dont listen to her, kid. Just keep digging. Never stop questioning everything.
> ...



Exactly why this youngin' shouldn't listen to the Ogre. You've proven yourself as an imbecile.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> > _"Some of today's immigrants to the United States and Canada are poor people pushed from their homes by economic desperation, but most are young, well educated people lured to economically growing countries."_
> >
> > I don't think this is true. With the millions and millions of uneducated people a year we're receiving from Latin America, I don't see how it can be.
> 
> ...




Okay, on the first statement it was in a context which talks about all immigrants, not just legal ones, but that set aside, only 9.8% of Latino LEGAL immigrants have a college degree, and 29% of white immigrants.   My textbook was just plain wrong saying that most immigrants are well-educated.

On the next statement, you are wrong about the 14th amendment protecting illegals, as it specifically states it only applies to "citizens" which undocumented people are not.   Regardless, it presents that "fact" as though everybody should support certain policies, and has no place in our public schools.   I'm assuming you don't support teaching creationism in our schools?  This is the same sort of deal.

Also, could you please give me your opinion on the statement about Al-Queada and the Taliban that neglects to mention religion as their main motive?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 17, 2012)

First, you are not a 14 year old, or you are one who had significant help from an adult.

Second, "*Some *of today's immigrants . . . [most of whom] are young, well educated people . . ." accurately and factually describe many African, Asian, and South American immigrants into western industrialized nations.  You need to read that sentence in context.

Third, "A much more extreme to globalization. . ." is rooted in the local and cultural beliefs of Afghanistan and Pakistan and various parts of the Middle East.  "globalization" is a term for "western secularization" resisted in the Muslim Middle and Far East.

Fourth, "hostile" is a nicer term yet less accurate than "nativism", the one usually used.  Does the book accurately tie the connection to the native-born American n hostility to both legal and illegal immigration in the 1850s in northern sea ports and cities?

I congratulate you on look for the contradictions, the second step of critical thinking.

Don't stop there.




Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...



And I side with the kid. In stead of marginalizing him, implying he is ignorant, perhaps you could explain where he is wrong. (and learn to spell sophomore)


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Dont listen to her, kid. Just keep digging. Never stop questioning everything.
> ...



I always do my best to discourage ignorance. Just ask Flaccid_Fable.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> First, you are not a 14 year old, or you are one who had significant help from an adult.
> 
> Second, "*Some *of today's immigrants . . . [most of whom] are young, well educated people . . ." accurately and factually describe many African, Asian, and South American immigrants into western industrialized nations.  You need to read that sentence in context.
> 
> ...



Okay, as flattered as I am that you think I seem older, I am only fourteen.  I'm a freshman.   I take the time to use proper grammar because I doubt anybody half intelligent would respond if I didn't.

The first sentence is in context, it was the beginning of a paragraph, and it outright said it as if it was fact that the majority of all immigrants from everywhere are well educated, which is not at all true.

Regarding the second point, like I said the book seems to deliberately avoid stating the religion of the terrorists, which is a very important fact.   They were not "opposing globalization"; they were opposing America's moral values due to their radical Muslim beliefs.

And yes, the book does briefly cover slavery; but that has nothing to do with today's immigration.  The book heavily implies that it's bad to not want to give illegals public services, which is taking a political position, is it not?


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 17, 2012)

If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.

Text books are only a tool, and only as good as the person teaching them.


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 17, 2012)

Oh, and of course text books can be bias. Again, it you are 14, you will eventually learn that it's nearly impossible to find anything that is totally unbiased, because we are humans not robots, and everyone( even the writers of text books) bring their own experiences to the table.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.
> 
> Text books are only a tool, and only as good as the person teaching them.



What do you want me to do, go and tell my obviously liberal teacher that they're teaching us bad information?   I'd look stupid; and I'd seem like I was overreacting.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Oh, and of course text books can be bias. Again, it you are 14, you will eventually learn that it's nearly impossible to find anything that is totally unbiased, because we are humans not robots, and everyone( even the writers of text books) bring their own experiences to the table.



Yeah, I know, but the problem is the book doesn't seem to have any conservatively biased parts of it; the school should demand better material.   I mean, they're already paying a fortune to these textbook monopolies!


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 17, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.
> ...



Your teacher is liberal, and therefore incapable of critical thinking? 

If you come prepared with facts and allow yourself to be open to a discussion, instead of a cocky kid who saunters in thinking he can "one up" the only person in the room with a college education, I have no doubt you will, at the least, walk away having learned something and having given your teacher something to think about.


----------



## daveman (Nov 17, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...


Man, you moonbats really HATE it when a kid questions his liberal indoctrination, don't you?


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 17, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > AmyNation said:
> ...



I think maybe I'll try that.   Probably towards the end of the school year, when I don't have to worry about it affecting my grades in any way (not that I should ever).   Also, I said "liberal" just because they seem to teach in a biased manner themselves.   They'd showed us a video called "Green: The new red, white, and blue.  And it said this, and I quote:   Being green is the most patriotic thing a person can do".


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 17, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...




Did your teacher produce the video?
Do you know what a curriculum is and how it is made for your school?
Do you think "being green" is unpatriotic? 

I think questioning your text books, and expanding your education beyond just what is taught is great. However you seem awfully convinced that you can't bring your questions to your class, and open a dialog with your teacher. That is where my confusion lies. If you have questions, or find inconsistencies in your text books, why do you assume your teacher would be unwilling to listsen?


----------



## oldfart (Nov 18, 2012)

Might I suggest a book by my old Division Chairman, James Loewen, even if his PhD is from Harvard.  He needs the royalties.  The title is  "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, Revised and Updated Edition".  I could only find three or four actual errors in it.  The actual topic is how textbooks in history and civics are written in America.  He is among the foremost scholars in this area and is well worth the read.  Other books by him in the same field include:  

"Teaching What Really Happened: How to Avoid the Tyranny of Textbooks and Get Students Excited About Doing History "

"The Confederate and Neo-Confederate Reader: The "Great Truth" about the 'Lost Cause"'

"Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sites Get Wrong"

While not trained as an historian, Dr. Loewen has written several good history books.  

On a personal note, since we no longer teach logic or rhetoric in our high schools (unless you attend a Latin school)I would recomment that you seek out a high school debate program if you wish to gain an education in logical reasoning and argumntation.  Fair warning:  the first thing you should learn from that endeavor is that just because you win an argument does not make you right.  In college forensics, all debaters alternate sides of the question.

Best of luck


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> no. he SHOULD listen to me.
> 
> don't encourage ignorance.





You're contradicting yourself.


----------



## Votto (Nov 18, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Oh, and of course text books can be bias. Again, it you are 14, you will eventually learn that it's nearly impossible to find anything that is totally unbiased, because we are humans not robots, and everyone( even the writers of text books) bring their own experiences to the table.



Spot on.  Facts are meaningless in and of themselves.  It is only when we assign value to those facts and then attempt to show how we believe they relate to the world in terms of association that they become meaningful.  In short, a belief system of sorts is vital to making sense of these facts and we all have one.  Unfortunatley, these belief systems are all flawed to various degrees.


----------



## Annie (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...


On this you are correct. The bias is obvious and kudos to you for recognizing.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...


You are neither smart enough nor knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on what is 'biased'.

A simple Copy&Paste, and lo and behold, a poignant response.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



I believe your assessment is fair, and I agree with you that the text is biased.

Textbooks would be 3 times as large if all the views had to be stated and included, unless people AGREED how to state things objectively without downplaying one point or another.

That would be great to reach a consensus with a diverse review panel where every viewpoint is represented, but the books might never make their publishing deadlines.

(Here in Texas, we even had a case of our state historical commission "altering" a narrative on a marker to REMOVE a reference to "segregation" of public housing, even though "segregation" was the actual term used, and the public housing was being recognized as a landmark in Civil Rights history, when the Civil Rights Act ended "segregation." Someone on the committee decided to describe the housing in another way, missing the entire point!
Again, due to deadlines it was better not to dispute the change, and just accept the plaque.)

Note: For those like Jillian who may not recognize any bias and think you are being trivial or petty, I will list examples of
changes I would have recommended to the editors:

Instead of "Hostile," they could have said "Opposing." That is more objective, without emotion or judgment attached to the opposition.

Instead of saying "needy" immigrants, they could have said "indigent" immigrants, which is more neutral.

Instead of just stating the laws are of dubious Constitutionality, they could have explained that people on both sides of the conflict over undocumented immigrants are seeking Constitutional protections of their rights they argue are threatened by the other policy.

This is too hard to say in a few words, to cover both sides equally, so the text will inevitably be limited by time and space.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> you are neither smart enough nor knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on what is 'biased'.
> 
> the text book isn't biased. you are.
> 
> ...



Really, Jillian?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> read.
> 
> learn.








Maybe you should worry about yourself in that regard before 'advising' others, eh?


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

I, for one am very grateful that my son, also 14, has been spared the politically correct indoctrination which has led to a generation of self-righteous whiners in the US and UK. There is no shortage of either on this site. Their indoctrination shines through in the regurgitated dogma that they reflexively spew.

In the Czech Republic children they do not learn of the great achievements of their primary minority, the Roma (Gypsies), or that all differences between groupings of people are necessarily superficial. On the other hand they are not taught to hate are disparage those whose appearance or behavior are unlike their own.

There are obvious influences both at home and away, but they are not systematically influenced by an educational agenda. They are allowed instead to form their own opinions of the world and those around them.


----------



## editec (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...


 
Do I think your HS geography textbook has a bias?

Hell, yes.

Although to be fair, writing a survey text of history or geography without an overarching biased POV is pretty damned difficult.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Your language clearly reveals you are not an adult.  And you need to explain more in fully your reasons for your opinions in you want to move beyond the second level of critical thinking.

The first paragraph, in context, began with "some".  It must be interpreted that way.  Talk to your English teacher.  

The second paragraph is correct in describing extremists as those who are opposing globalization.  They are.  You can add to the conversation that you think the extremists religion should be mentioned.

Finally, that you are upset with the word the use of "hostility", which does describe accurately  the nativism of many Americans who oppose immigrants, indicates you may be influenced by nativism.





Politicskid said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > First, you are not a 14 year old, or you are one who had significant help from an adult.
> ...


----------



## jillian (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > read.
> ...



i've done fine. thanks. 

clearly you haven't.


----------



## jillian (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...




^^^^^^^

proof of the failure that occurs when one has no education.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid, Ever see the movie "A Beautiful Mind"? Jake, thinks he's a Communist infiltrator of the Republican Party. He's convinced himself that his landlady, Madame Blitzman, a Russian emigre is his "Handler"

Oh, best of all, Jake thinks none of us have noticed his bizarre behavior.

Shhh, don't tell Jake we're on to him



JakeStarkey said:


> Your language clearly reveals you are not an adult.  And you need to explain more in fully your reasons for your opinions in you want to move beyond the second level of critical thinking.
> 
> The first paragraph, in context, began with "some".  It must be interpreted that way.  Talk to your English teacher.
> 
> ...


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 18, 2012)

My kids came back from college (NYU and Maryland) convinced that FDR was "Great" and I felt that I failed as a parent


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Frank, you failed in American history and government not as a parent.

You can't even define communism and apply it to your arguments about America.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Frank, you failed in American history and government not as a parent.
> 
> You can't even define communism and apply it to your arguments about America.



Jake, explain to me how FDR's average 20% unemployment from his inauguration in 1933 until Hitler conquered France in 1940 was a "Success"


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Only if you learn how to spell instead...


----------



## jillian (Nov 18, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



the kid is a child who needs encouragement from people who actually believe in education... not from people (not you, but like some others) who think an education is a liberal plot.

i never could spell that word for some reason...


----------



## jillian (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



oops...


----------



## Sunni Man (Nov 18, 2012)

Jillian is a typical limousine liberal who drives by the poor homeless people in her new Lexus with doors locked and windows rolled up to avoid their stench. 

And thinks voting Democrat is the ultimate answer to their plight.


----------



## del (Nov 18, 2012)

obvious troll is obvious

*only 14 and defending the pursuit of happiness*


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 18, 2012)

Certainly takes one to know one, del.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Explain communism and how it applies to America.

This is what I mean: you twist evidence to your pre-determined conclusion. 





CrusaderFrank said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Frank, you failed in American history and government not as a parent.
> ...


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Explain communism and how it applies to America.
> 
> This is what I mean: you twist evidence to your pre-determined conclusion.
> 
> ...



Of course you can't explain FDR so you deflect.

It's Neo-Marxism in the USA today. It's Marxism, redistribution packaged as Democrat "Compassion" and "rights"


----------



## TakeAStepBack (Nov 18, 2012)

The least they could do is buy some private sector wrapping paper. It would make 50% of Americans look less foolish...


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Meathead said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...


Madam, I have zits on my ass there a more learned than you.


----------



## editec (Nov 18, 2012)

Perhaps the reason that FDR is often touted as a great President has to do not with what he did but* what he likely prevented.*


I believe that FDR saved this nation from going down the extreme political avenues like that Russia went down(Marxist communism) and Germany went, down (modern Fascist socialism).

How did he do that?

By giving the American people HOPE that capitalism could be saved with some minor modifications (banking and stock market laws, mostly) and that once saved, the workers would once again be (small) benefactors of it.


FRD was considered a GREAT president by the people who lived THOUGH the depression and who saw how his "Aphabet Soup" of relief organizations and new policies gave them and their families help to survive until better times.



Had FDR not done many of policies that so many here complain about as creeping socialist, I suspect that this nation might actually have gone much further down the road of authentic socialism (be it the Marxist variety socialism or the FASCIST variety socialism) than it did.


----------



## jillian (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



in your rightwingnut fantasies.


----------



## Paulie (Nov 18, 2012)

Annie said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



They probably recognized Bin Laden because his name and face had been getting mentioned and shown all over the news frequently leading up to 9/11.


----------



## Paulie (Nov 18, 2012)

editec said:


> Perhaps the reason that FDR is often touted as a great President has to do not with what he did but* what he likely prevented.*
> 
> 
> I believe that FDR saved this nation from going down the extreme political avenues like that Russia went down(Marxist communism) and Germany went, down (modern Fascist socialism).
> ...



Really...

I suppose Hoover was just misunderstood then huh?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



You're correct.  Your textbooks are biased.  This isn't news, unfortunately.  My textbooks were biased back in the 80s; my daughter's textbooks were biased when she went to high school.  Look at it as motivation to get out, research, and learn far beyond what's contained in one lousy textbook.  Not only will you be better informed about the world around you - and better informed than 99% of the people around you - but it will be good training for later in life, when the disinformation is even more blatant.

I'm a little curious as to why you think this is Unconstitutional.  Unethical, I grant you.  Counter-productive to the long-term interests of the nation, sure.  Unconstitutional?  I'd like to hear your thought process on that.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner..
> ...



Jillian isn't a big fan of that whole "independent thinking" thing.  She's got a whole raft of reasons why various people should never, EVER attempt to think about things or form their own opinion, and should instead blindly toe the government line and swallow whatever line they are fed.

I don't doubt for a second that Jillian would whup any child of hers that started developing such a nasty, questioning streak.  I also don't doubt for a second that any child of Jillian's would be genetically incapable of thinking independently about whether or not to come in out of the rain unless receiving direct instructions from the DNC on the subject.

On the bright side, liberal ignoramuses like Jillian will be working for you some day.  On the down side, they're too pig-stupid and lazy to be worth much.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> TakeAStepBack said:
> 
> 
> > Dont listen to her, kid. Just keep digging. Never stop questioning everything.
> ...



You're right.  He SHOULD listen to you.  You're one of the best living examples of what NOT to do and what NOT to be that I've ever seen.

THIS is what you become when you worship the government, kid:  a mindless cow contentedly chewing your cud while waiting in line for the slaughterhouse, telling people they're "too ignorant to be allowed to think and question", which is quite possibly the most hysterical thing I've heard all week.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > > _"Some of today's immigrants to the United States and Canada are poor people pushed from their homes by economic desperation, but most are young, well educated people lured to economically growing countries."_
> ...



Is anyone else fascinated by the sight of a high school freshman taking apart two of the most arrogant liberal _poseurs _on the boards like cheap watches?


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > TakeAStepBack said:
> ...


Spot on!

 Kid, think for yourself and be happy Jillian is not your mother.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > First, you are not a 14 year old, or you are one who had significant help from an adult.
> ...



I'm laughing my ass off that Jake thinks a 14-year-old can't possibly post intelligent, well-reasoned, and grammatical remarks without the help of an adult, since the main reason he thinks that is because HE HIMSELF - as a putative adult - cannot match the performance.  

I don't know this kid, so I obviously can't vouch for whether or not he IS a kid, but I can say that my own son was more than capable of doing the same thing at fourteen.  I hate to break it to some of you, but not everyone in the country has succumbed to your "grunting and pointing is enough" standards of education.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.
> ...



Amy's half-right; you SHOULD go do your own research.  Is there any point to arguing with your teacher about what you find?  Probably not.  Even if your teacher wasn't liberal, he or she has no control over which textbooks the school uses.  You'll have to judge for yourself how willing you are to sit quietly and listen if and when a teacher starts propounding things you know to be nonsense in a lecture.  I can definitely promise you that it WILL happen at some point in your education, and we've all had to decide whether it was worth confronting quite possibly the whole class, and risking a bad grade.

The lesson to take away from this can be summed up by a quote from Ronald Reagan:  Trust, but verify.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

CrusaderFrank said:


> My kids came back from college (NYU and Maryland) convinced that FDR was "Great" and I felt that I failed as a parent



That's where the whole "communicating with your kids" thing comes in handy.  I have lengthy discussions with my son concerning everything he ever thinks about (no wonder I'm getting gray hairs!  )  When the subject of FDR and his "New Deal" came up, I took him to talk to his grandmother and other people who actually lived through it.  Not that you ever want to substitute anecdotal "evidence" for historical fact, but those viewpoints can go a long way toward fleshing out the realities behind the bare, cold info.

I know you, Frank, and I find it very hard to believe that you just let "FDR was great" stand unchallenged.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Meathead said:
> ...



And THEIR pus probably doesn't explode everywhere nearly as often as Jillian's does.


----------



## rdean (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



Hates gays.
Against women's rights.

Hmmm, sounds like right wing Christians.

I think it's you who biased.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



You see, Jill, Conservatives believe in education. (The process of receiving or giving systematic instruction) We just take issue with indoctrination.

An example: My son Greg is 34. When he was in 4th grade, I thumbed through his Social Studies text. I found one paragraph on the US Constitution and 4 pages on Martin Luther King.
I can pretty much live my entire life knowing nothing about King, other than the very basics, but the Constitution is something that affects my life daily.
Teaching the Constitution runs counter to Liberal indoctrination and may just cause a 14 year old to question what he is being taught.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



For more reasons than I could possibly list here.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Ernie S. said:
> ...



You're going to have to explain the difference between "education" and "indoctrination" to Jillian, as both words contain more than one syllable.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Ernie S. said:
> ...



I was taught that it was 2 words. I believe either is acceptable now. Instead seems more common. I guess I'm just old


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

rdean said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



There was no indication in what he wrote that he hates gays or is against women's rights, only an indication that he is capable of independent thought.
It's a shame that contemporary Liberal indoctrination seeks to discourage that.


----------



## daveman (Nov 18, 2012)

rdean said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...


Politicskid, pay no mind to Rderp.  He's a serial liar.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

I'm laughing that CeCi who is challenged with diction and syntax issues believes she is posting any "intelligent, well-reasoned, and" grammatically sophisticated piece of writing.  CeCi, also, would benefit from an adult's help.  Thanks, CeCi, for posting.   Your type of reasoning and thinking catlogues examples of why we lost this election.

Neither the poseur nor CeCi have noted the bias of the "kid's" post against the supposed bias of the "text book."





Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> .
> 
> Finally, that you are upset with the word the use of "hostility", which does describe accurately  the nativism of many Americans who oppose immigrants, indicates you may be influenced by nativism.




LOL! And YOU are trying to lecture this kid about "critical thinking"? What a joke.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...






It doesn't seem that way.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> the kid is a child who needs encouragement from people who actually believe in education...








Then why do YOU keep posting here?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

editec said:


> FRD was considered a GREAT president by the people who lived THOUGH the depression .





And how about the more than 100,000 Americans he threw into concentration camps? Do you think they considered/consider him "great"? What did he "prevent" for them? Their freedom? Their human dignity? Their private property? Their families? Their rights as US citizens? Fuck that sucmbag.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > FRD was considered a GREAT president by the people who lived THOUGH the depression .
> ...


You're a hopelessly self-righteous windbag, and a bit scummy to boot.


----------



## Annie (Nov 18, 2012)

editec said:


> Perhaps the reason that FDR is often touted as a great President has to do not with what he did but* what he likely prevented.*
> 
> 
> I believe that FDR saved this nation from going down the extreme political avenues like that Russia went down(Marxist communism) and Germany went, down (modern Fascist socialism).
> ...



LOL! Jobs 'saved' right? Measurably unmeasurable.


----------



## Annie (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Indeed, and note the difference between bias or a point-of-view and re-writing, IOW lies, regarding history.


----------



## Annie (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Jake and Jillian though would find him 'brilliantly precocious' if he agreed with their political world view.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Annie said:


> editec said:
> 
> 
> > Perhaps the reason that FDR is often touted as a great President has to do not with what he did but* what he likely prevented.*
> ...



If your biggest claim to "greatness" is being better than what people imagine COULD have happened, you pretty much suck.  People can imagine a whole lot of stupid shit, all at the same time and nevertheless largely contradictory, and being better than an invasion by hostile buglike aliens or a meteor strike the size of Texas is not exactly the bar I'm looking for our leaders to clear.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Jillian and I do not have the same world view, Annie, but you are correct in suggesting that we do not see the world as do wack far right extremists or libertarians.

I do agree with you that Politicskid writes better than CeCi.


----------



## del (Nov 18, 2012)

TakeAStepBack said:


> Certainly takes one to know one, del.



are you training for next year's marathon?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare continues to inaccurately use the term "concentration camp" for where the Japanese-American internees were housed during WWII.  If he continually used the term in history class, he would be corrected then start losing points off the grade.

_A place where large numbers of political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities are imprisoned, esp. in Nazi Germany and occupied...
More info » Dictionary.com _


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

Jillian, Jake Starkey and now Del! I ask you, can a thread to piss on get better?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

You are lucky, Meathead, that when you screw up, as we all do, you have the best in Jill and Del to take care of you when you are being silly.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > editec said:
> ...





How so? Can you dispute any of the FACTS mentioned above?


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > AmyNation said:
> ...



No my teacher didn't produce the video.   Basically, it was a persuasive clip that advocated for "green" energy use, but not the practical kind.   You know, solar and wind, and heavily implied that we could run our day to day live off of just these sources, which is not the case.  

And no, of course I don't think being green is unpatriotic!   I simply think that it is a huge overstatement to say that it's the most patriotic thing you can do for your country.  That virtually implies that being green should be your highest priority, which is very debatable.

I don't know, I might tell my teacher when the school year gets closer to the end.  I just don't want to appear like I'm overreacting.   Also, I know he has no control over what textbooks we use.  He actually is a very good teacher, probably my favorite.  Don't get me wrong.   In fact, he got the school bored to allow my school to offer and him to teach the only freshman AP classes in Oregon!  As it stands, I just don't want to waste his time.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> You are lucky, Meathead, that when you screw up, as we all do, you have the best in Jill and Del to take care of you when you are being silly.


I have no idea what the hell that means.

 In my short time here, I have found the three of you, among others, to be the most ill-informed and dogmatic bunch of intellectual midgets I've seen in some time. I am sure there are others, but for whatever reason, I have been indelibly  unimpressed by the three of you on this thread.

Nothing personal, but I do not suffer fools gladly.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Unkotare continues to inaccurately use the term "concentration camp" for where the Japanese-American internees were housed during WWII.  If he continually used the term in history class, he would be corrected then start losing points off the grade.
> 
> _A place where large numbers of political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities are imprisoned, esp. in Nazi Germany and occupied...
> More info » Dictionary.com _




It is exactly the correct term, whether you are comfortable with it or not. It is the term the scumbag FDR used himself. I have "continually used" the term in classes attended and classes taught. As usual, YOU don't know what you are talking about.

"political prisoners"
"persecuted minorities"

Try reading the words instead of just cutting and pasting them, you ignorant clown.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

oldfart said:


> Might I suggest a book by my old Division Chairman, James Loewen, even if his PhD is from Harvard.  He needs the royalties.  The title is  "Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong, Revised and Updated Edition".  I could only find three or four actual errors in it.  The actual topic is how textbooks in history and civics are written in America.  He is among the foremost scholars in this area and is well worth the read.  Other books by him in the same field include:
> 
> "Teaching What Really Happened: How to Avoid the Tyranny of Textbooks and Get Students Excited About Doing History "
> 
> ...




Okay thanks, I'll check some of those out!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

"Waste his time", kid.  Believe me, he will respond most favorably.  He will respond positively to this type of interaction, if you are indeed what you claim to be.

And if you are, accept my apology for doubting you.

If you are interested in how text books reflect contemporary mores and beliefs, pick up a Texas history book for 1955 and 1956.  See how it deals with issues of race, _Brown_, and see how many darker faces you will find in the photos.





Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Annie said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



Thanks for your response.   Regarding, the point about 9/11, it may be obvious, but isn't it important to at least remind people, especially when talking about the motives?  Remember, most people in my class were only 3 years old when it happened.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

emilynghiem said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



Thanks for your response

Yes, you are correct that it's impractical for a textbook to mention every talking point, but the problem here is there doesn't seem to be really any places in the textbook where it only shares a conservative point of view, that's why I think this book should be replaced next year.   How do you feel?


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

del said:


> obvious troll is obvious
> 
> *only 14 and defending the pursuit of happiness*



Troll?   

What, you don't like my slogan?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



I can't see that asking questions and seeking a deeper understanding of what you're told could possibly be a waste of his time.  In fact, seems to me that that's his JOB.

By the way, it's "school BOARD", however unintentionally accurate your slip might have been


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

CeCi got this right.  That's an improvement.  Good.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



Here's why I say it's unconstitutional.   This is a publicly funded school, which most parents have no choice but to send their children to.   Government shouldn't be allowed to endorse a certain political viewpoint, as they can't endorse a religious viewpoint (separation of church and state) Religion and politics are often related, so thus schools aren't constitutionally permitted to endorse certain political positions.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Oh, you've had information withheld from you concerning Muslims for a lot longer than just the section on 9/11.  Do you know how many years after high school it was before I found out that the Muslims were the REAL reason behind Christopher Columbus's attempts to find a new route to India?  The schools left the vague impression that he and all the other great exlorers had no other motivation than zealous curiosity about what lay over the horizon.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Unkotare continues to inaccurately use the term "concentration camp" for where the Japanese-American internees were housed during WWII.  If he continually used the term in history class, he would be corrected then start losing points off the grade.
> 
> _A place where large numbers of political prisoners or members of persecuted minorities are imprisoned, esp. in Nazi Germany and occupied...
> More info » Dictionary.com _



How is an "Internment Camp" different from a Concentration Camp? Stars and stripes in stead of Swastikas?


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Regardless of whether I give into this or not, it wouldn't matter if 90% of the future voters are misinformed.   We'd end up with a bunch of really lousy politicians.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Gallows, crematoria, 700-calories a day for food,  no medical attention, aribtrary beatings and torture and execution?



Ernie S. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare continues to inaccurately use the term "concentration camp" for where the Japanese-American internees were housed during WWII.  If he continually used the term in history class, he would be corrected then start losing points off the grade.
> ...


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



I think that since they can't present every viewpoint and opinion, they should stay out of that area and just present the hard facts.  You can figure out for yourself what you want to think and feel about them.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Annie said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



If you are actually sincere in pursuing an objective, factual analysis of your textbook, instructors, and classes overall, consider the fact that there was no bias with regard to the religion of the 9/11 conspirators; where their religion was incidental and irrelevant, the myth that Islam alone poses some sort of threat to the United States. 

America was attacked by criminals, and Islam was as much their victim.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

rdean said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



Actually, I'm not Baptized and have only been inside a church a handful of times.  You can't assume things like that.  And what women's right am I advocating for restricting, and when did I say I hate homosexuals?

Now would you like to give actual reasons as to why you don't think my textbook is biased?


----------



## del (Nov 18, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare continues to inaccurately use the term "concentration camp" for where the Japanese-American internees were housed during WWII.  If he continually used the term in history class, he would be corrected then start losing points off the grade.
> ...



there's a decided lack of ovens in one

but, please, continue


----------



## Samson (Nov 18, 2012)

del said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



The Japanese do not appreciate fresh bread.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You are lucky, Meathead, that when you screw up, as we all do, you have the best in Jill and Del to take care of you when you are being silly.
> ...



I wouldn't call any of them mental midgets. They all are fairly intelligent, if somewhat misguided, individuals.
I may disagree with del's and Jillian's politics, but insulting their intelligence because of their dedication to their beliefs is unfair.
Jake, on the other hand, has no solid beliefs other than the fact that having a solid belief system is evil. I call him a "radical moderate".
Yes I'm aware that that is an oxymoron, but then, it seems to fit.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Here's why I say it's unconstitutional.   This is a publicly funded school, which most parents have no choice but to send their children to.   Government shouldn't be allowed to endorse a certain political viewpoint, as they can't endorse a religious viewpoint (separation of church and state) Religion and politics are often related, so thus schools aren't constitutionally permitted to endorse certain political positions.





Yeah, no. You might want to put that one away until you've thought it through a little more.


----------



## rdean (Nov 18, 2012)

Ernie S. said:


> rdean said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Don't worry, when someone feels textbooks should teach children to hate other people's religion, therefore other people, there is plently more hate to feast upon than just from that one group.  Hate never stops with one group.  It's a cancer that spreads.  To want to teach it proves there are already infected.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > AmyNation said:
> ...



Woops.   I'm on my iPod touch and iOS does this stupid autocorrect thing.   I'm sure the school boards meeting are pretty boring, though.

Like I said, I'll probably go to him towards the end of the year.   Thanks for the encouragement.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Samson said:


> The Japanese do not appreciate fresh bread.





If you were looking for something stupid to say, you found it.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > obvious troll is obvious
> ...



Trolls: Don't feed them.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...




I don't think regular Islam does, of course not.   So you think that the terrorists just attacked America because they didn't like how our ideas were taking over their society, not because they conflicted with their religious beliefs?


----------



## Samson (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Terrorists attacked the US in hopes the US would retaliate in kind against Saudi Arabia (where the terrorists were from).

Had nothing to do with preventing the spread of western culture or religion.


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


The current trend is to say that America deserved it because of their foreign policy.
 This would be especially so among those who blame Bush and Reagan for everything.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Samson said:


> Terrorists attacked the US in hopes the US would retaliate in kind against Saudi Arabia .





No they didn't.


----------



## Samson (Nov 18, 2012)

Meathead said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



The "current trend?" Where? The Taliban?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Well, as I said, it's certainly unethical.  However, you shouldn't allow yourself to fall into the trap of sloppy thinking that afflicts so many people in the US today, and assume that because something is wrong to do, that means the US Constitution prohibits it.

The US Constitution actually says nothing about schools, nor does it say anything about government espousing a political viewpoint.  Furthermore, I have to say that "religion and politics are often related, so no political positions" is a major leap in logic, and just doesn't make it.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Gallows, crematoria, 700-calories a day for food,  no medical attention, aribtrary beatings and torture and execution?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Point taken.
But denying freedom and confiscating the property of a hundred thousand citizens based on skin color seems very KKK'ish, doesn't it?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Annie said:
> ...



One fact you need to be aware of is that there are a lot of people like Clayton here, who would rather see the collapse of our nation and way of life rather than abandon the politically-correct pretense that Western culture hasn't been at war with radical Isam for centuries.


----------



## there4eyeM (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



Of course it is incorrect. School at your age is mostly trying to prepare you approximately for the position society thinks you will fill. All the truth is much too long and complex, even if they had the truth and wanted to teach it to you, which they do not.
One must inform oneself independently and objectively, and that is very difficult. It requires earnest and vigorous intellectual honesty. It is much too much trouble for most people. Accepting the 'received wisdom' is safer and easier. Ultimately, you may be happier with it. Otherwise, you will be an outsider and may become cynical, bitter and detached.

Be careful.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 18, 2012)

rdean said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > rdean said:
> ...



Do you EVER speak to the subject? Your rhetoric gets shot down and rather than a response, we get more rhetoric.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

del said:


> Ernie S. said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



I wasn't aware that the definition of "concentration camp" included anything about ovens, but please, continue.  I'm alway fascinated to hear how the English-challenged among us have decided to rewrite the dictionary THIS week.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> C_Clayton_Jones said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



I'll tell you what, kid.  If you really want to learn something meaningful, useful, and possibly life-saving about history and the world, you should undertake a thorough study and research of Islam's hisory and its teachings, and not just default to the nicey-nice, PC dreck spewed out by damned near everyone.

I would also suggest that you develop a complete immunity to the words "bigot" and "racist".  They are terrible things to actually BE, but the words are weapons used by the ignorant to keep everyone around them ignorant and too afraid to change it.  Find the truth, learn the truth, embrace the truth, and never, ever give a damn if someone's going to call you names because of it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Ethnocentric, sure.  KKK'ish: you mean blow torches, torture, barbed wire, lynchings, that KKK'ish?



Ernie S. said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Gallows, crematoria, 700-calories a day for food,  no medical attention, aribtrary beatings and torture and execution?
> ...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Use a dictionary, for starters to continue your "fascination" with the challenges of English.



Cecilie1200 said:


> del said:
> 
> 
> > Ernie S. said:
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Use a dictionary, for starters to continue your "fascination" with the challenges of English.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




She is accurate in her use of English and you are not (again).


----------



## Meathead (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Use a dictionary, for starters to continue your "fascination" with the challenges of English.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I am not sure someone who is as "simple-minded" as you are should have any say in anything.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Neither of you are very good with it, Unk.





Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Use a dictionary, for starters to continue your "fascination" with the challenges of English.
> ...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Look at the word sillies come out of the walls!


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Neither of you are very good with it, Unk.




You, of course, have no idea what you are talking about. This is really not the subject for you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Yup, you really don't get it.

Once again, tell us how American internment camps are like German concentration camps.


----------



## Annie (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Most of my professors were 'liberal' it's the nature of the beast in universities. However, high school teachers are a different breed in many cases. The best way to get a 'feel' if they'll harm your grade by an opposing point of view in an essay or debate is to talk to them 'outside' of class time. Professors often like a contrarian point of view, even if in discussion you sway the audience. It leads to better reviews for the teacher.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Yup, you really don't get it.
> 
> Once again, tell us how American internment camps are like German concentration camps.




I didn't mention Nazi concentration camps. I mentioned FDR's concentration camps. Try to pay attention, idiot.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

You continue to use the inappropriate terminology, and you continue to be obstructionist and wrong.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> You continue to use the inappropriate terminology, and you continue to be obstructionist and wrong.




It is the correct and accurate term, you fool. Your inability to understand the English language is one of your many shortcomings.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

The term in context is inappropriate, and when you use concentration camp, you align yourself with the Nazis.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

No matter how many times you post, you will still be wrong. I'm sorry English is such a mystery to you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

You have aligned yourselves with the Nazi and will always be wrong to use that term.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > C_Clayton_Jones said:
> ...



Is anyone else fascinated by the sight of neocon whackjobs actually believing this is a high school freshmen, then giving the sock a slap on the back for 'taking apart' two posters who are handing this 'kid' his/her arse on a plate...


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> I hate to break it to some of you, but not everyone in the country has succumbed to your "grunting and pointing is enough" standards of education.



This is almost sig worthy in describing most neocon whackjobs on this board, including the ill-informed, ignorant, arrogant, twat that is the Cesspit....


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



Neo-con whackjobs are always fascinating, particularly with regard to their ability to be so consistently wrong.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



They are consistently wrong in most things, but what is particularly chuckle-worthy in this thread is the likes of Cesspit rambling on about indoctrination of liberals, when if there is one political POV that is drowning in such, it's the neocon whackjobs like the Cesspit. It's comical...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

CeCi is fun to watch.  Her sophomoric grasp of syntax and diction amuses me most.  But give her credit: she is the girl whose gift keeps on giving.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



I'm fascinated by the fact you don't think I'm 14.   What, do you want a copy of my birth certificate?


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> I'm fascinated by the fact you don't think I'm 14.   What, do you want a copy of my birth certificate?



You well could be, but there are few people I take at face value on the Internet. You are not one of them...

And no, I'm not a birfer. In saying that, I'm very surprised those that have taken to you (the likes of Cesspit etc) haven't asked for it. They don't seem to worry about asking for your POTUS's birth certificate...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Nah, Politicskid is an adult, of course.

PK was not particularly good at this, but, hey, it made for a fun Sunday.

And CeCi got to do her doosh act again, so she's happy.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > I'm fascinated by the fact you don't think I'm 14.   What, do you want a copy of my birth certificate?
> ...



A birfer?  What's a birfer?  

I don't blame you for not trusting everyone you meet on the Internet, but would you have preffered I'd have pretended to be an adult?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)




----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Use a dictionary, for starters to continue your "fascination" with the challenges of English.
> ...



That is not to mention that _I _know I said, "English-_challenged_", while Jake mistakenly thought I said, "English".


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Annie said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > AmyNation said:
> ...



Well, a college professor is, presumably, more thoroughly educated in his subject than a high school teacher, and OUGHT to be more secure in his position and knowledge.  Therefore, they can, again presumably, be more comfortable with the fact that a lively debate and exchange of ideas can only help their students to be better-educated.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

I was quite accurate in stating CeCi is challenged in her use of English.  

Observe her failings in diction and syntax.  She is the gift who keeps on giving.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 18, 2012)

jillian said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



In other words

The bias of the books is the same as yours, and not based entirely on facts.

fdr was a tyrant, anyone that says otherwise is nothing less than a liar.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Cecilie1200 said:
> ...



Fourteen-year-olds in LibWorld are required to be ignorant mall rats, speaking strictly in text-speech and wondering who can babysit their kids this Friday so they can go out partying with their Baby Mama/Daddy.  Oh, and waiting impatiently for their food stamps to arrive.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Possibly in the sense of 2b, but that is not what you meant.

Tyrant  Definition of TYRANT  1 a : an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution
b : a usurper of sovereignty  2 a : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally  b : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power




Two Thumbs said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Possibly in the sense of 2b, but that is not what you meant.
> 
> Tyrant  Definition of TYRANT  1 a : an absolute ruler unrestrained by law or constitution
> b : a usurper of sovereignty  2 a : a ruler who exercises absolute power oppressively or brutally  b : one resembling an oppressive ruler in the harsh use of authority or power
> ...



A yellow face got you put in "camp" along side people that had a wrong sounding last name.
He confiscated property
He confiscated wealth


Seems I'm fully correct.


ok, he was a "soft" tyrant, since he only killed black men by having experiments done on them.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Two Thumbs said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Possibly in the sense of 2b, but that is not what you meant.
> ...



Do you believe the stuff you type?


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Cecilie1200 said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



go cry to a mod or taking your beating like a man.

well, like a liberal male


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



I'm historically correct.

So yeah.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

FDR performed experiments on black patients?  Let's see: was he a doctor, a nurse, a medical orderly?

He took peoples' wealth and property?  Let's see: was he a full time, a part time, or an equal opportunity tyrant?

Two Thumbs, you and your buds have fail on this argument a dozen times already, but we can keep it up forever, because you fill the Catholic teach pedagogy that a bad example like you is a great example for observers to not emulate.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Two Thumbs said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Two Thumbs said:
> ...



You're historically correct like OJ wasn't guilty, or Dumbya was a great president, or Joe McCarthy was a 'good' guy...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr G, if they pulled this in college class, they would fail.  You know as well as I they are in no position of authority to influence anybody or anything.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> You have aligned yourselves with the Nazi and will always be wrong to use that term.




That is incorrect, you ignorant fool. FDR threw innocent Americans (some of the very best and bravest, as it turns out) into concentration camps. That is what they were, that is what he called them, and that is a fact of history no matter how much it upsets you. You can't talk your way around it. Semantics is not on your side any more than the facts are. Now, get ahold of your little emotions and face reality.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > You have aligned yourselves with the Nazi and will always be wrong to use that term.
> ...



They were not concentration camps....I've visited Dachau - that was a concentration camp. These were internment camps. Huge difference.

you have to remember, that in 1942 the VAST majority of other Americans agreed with the govt...probably most of your ancestors. And going from what Iv'e seen on these boards over the past 6 years, ALL conservatives would have agreed, too...

we can all Monday morning quarterback on this..


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...




Language, like almost everything else, is not his strong suit.


----------



## uscitizen (Nov 18, 2012)

Human geography?
People getting maps tatooed on themselves now?


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...





They were - by definition - concentration camps. That's why FDR called them concentration camps. The English language does not change in response to your discomfort.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 18, 2012)

uscitizen said:


> Human geography?
> People getting maps tatooed on themselves now?



Lol.   No, Human Geography is the study of human interaction withe the environment, at least according to my biased textbook.   I wouldn't know if I'd trust that definition, though!


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 18, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> uscitizen said:
> 
> 
> > Human geography?
> ...



No, they're correct.  An example would be . . . Switzerland's famous neutrality, made possible by the fact that their country is ringed in by the Alps.  Another example would be the much-decried fact that Americans are so much less likely to visit other countries than Europeans, which is due to the tandem facts that 1) we're separated by oceans and a lot of territory from most other countries, where Europeans need only a train ride of a few hours to cross a border, and 2) our own country is so very large and diverse in itself.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...



It's safe to say that the term "Concentration camp" has entered the vernacular to mean those camps run by Nazi's to inter Jews, Homosexuals, Gypsies etc.

Don't believe me? Do a little experiment. Go outside and ask the first 100 passers by what is the first thing that comes into their minds when you say 'concentration camp'..

Write down how many say things like Nazis, Jews and Holocaust. Write down how many talk about Japanese in the US during WWII...


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 18, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > uscitizen said:
> ...



More drivel. Switzerland is not 'ringed' by the Alps. The southern part, and a fraction of the west has the Alps. Hardly a fact.....


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...




What the term 'concentration camp' means is not limited to what the Nazis did. FDR threw over 100,000 innocent Americans into *concentration camps*. That is a fact.

There are prisons in the US where inmates can go online, watch cable TV, exercise all day, study towards a college degree, or even work to earn money for themselves. There are prisons in other parts of the world where inmates are beaten, starved, and killed. This does not mean that those places in the US are not 'prisons.' They are, because words mean something. 

As for 'the man on the street,' go outside and ask 100 people to locate Burkina Faso on a map. Does the inevitable result mean that Burkina Faso doesn't exist, or that we must call it something other than a 'country'?

Try to think a little more carefully.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 18, 2012)

The "fact" as Unkotare uses it is historically and culturally inaccurate.

His insistence is meaningless.





Unkotare said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Unkotare said:
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 18, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> The "fact" as Unkotare uses it is historically and culturally inaccurate.






Wrong AGAIN, ignorant turd.


----------



## Two Thumbs (Nov 18, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Two Thumbs said:
> 
> 
> > Dr Grump said:
> ...



Well gee, these people agree with me that you're an idiot;

FDR&#8217;s Heinous Crimes

On April 5, 1933, Franklin D. Roosevelt ordered the confiscation of gold from US citizens, in one of the most heinous acts of mass-robbery imagineable. Below is the text of Roosevelts order. 

Abandoned the gold standard, forbade the private ownership of gold in almost all cases, nullified all contractual promises  public or private, past or future  to pay in gold. 

Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933. It provided for acreage and production controls, restrictive marketing agreements, and regulatory licensing of processors and dealers to eliminate unfair practices and charges. It authorized new lending, taxed processors of agricultural commodities, and rewarded farmers who cut back production.

And thats not even including World War II. After ruining the US, FDR turned to bigger and better things: ruining the world. He was determined to get into the second world war. He knew about Pearl Harbor and did nothing. He became close friends with historys largest mass-murderer, Joseph Stalin (who was responsible for more murders than Hitler). Stalin was a suitable friend for FDR. Completing his legacy, FDR insured that half of Europe would be in economic ruin for more than half a century after his death via his agreements with Stalin and Churchill at Yalta.

OOOHHHH SNAP!!  PBS says you're an idiot!!  Keep an eye out for Big Birds pecker

Children of the Camps | INTERNMENT HISTORY

Following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor on December 7, 1941, President Franklin D. Roosevelt issued Executive Order 9066, which permitted the military to circumvent the constitutional safeguards of American citizens in the name of national defense.

The order set into motion the exclusion from certain areas, and the evacuation and mass incarceration of 120,000 persons of Japanese ancestry living on the West Coast, most of whom were U.S. citizens or legal permanent resident aliens. 

Tuskegee syphilis experiment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Tuskegee syphilis experiment[1] (also known as the Tuskegee syphilis study or Public Health Service syphilis study) was an infamous clinical study conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama by the U.S. Public Health Service to study the natural progression of untreated syphilis in poor, rural black men who thought they were receiving free health care from the U.S. government.[1]




In other words asshole, fdr was a fucking traitor that should have been given the chair.

Lie all you want, historical facts don't change


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 18, 2012)

Hey kid, have you shown this thread to your mom?


----------



## bripat9643 (Nov 19, 2012)

The text book is obviously biased.  You're a dimwit.

A high school freshmen is obviously smarter than you are.

Sad.



jillian said:


> you are neither smart enough nor knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on what is 'biased'.
> 
> the text book isn't biased. you are.
> 
> ...


----------



## bripat9643 (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.
> ...



Don't discuss it with your teacher.  That will only make him/her hostile towards you.


----------



## bripat9643 (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Oh, and of course text books can be bias. Again, it you are 14, you will eventually learn that it's nearly impossible to find anything that is totally unbiased, because we are humans not robots, and everyone( even the writers of text books) bring their own experiences to the table.
> ...




The school got just the kind of material it wanted.  The school wants biased material because the people who run the schools are biased.


----------



## bripat9643 (Nov 19, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > AmyNation said:
> ...



He will also receive lower grades than he deserves from then on.

Your advice to the kid is detrimental to his welfare.

Shut the fuck up.


----------



## bripat9643 (Nov 19, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> Did your teacher produce the video?
> Do you know what a curriculum is and how it is made for your school?
> Do you think "being green" is unpatriotic?
> 
> I think questioning your text books, and expanding your education beyond just what is taught is great. However you seem awfully convinced that you can't bring your questions to your class, and open a dialog with your teacher. That is where my confusion lies. If you have questions, or find inconsistencies in your text books, why do you assume your teacher would be unwilling to listsen?



He's obviously smarter than you are.  He understand human nature.  You pretend that teachers don't mind having their biases questioned.  I've never seen such idiocy posted in this forum before.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

Yup, yes, you are.  You would receive an F in a college class for your repeated misuse of the word.

_When it comes to torture, rape and murder they were no different but at the same time they cannot be compared to Nazi concentration camps which were basically 'slow killing camps' meaning that you were worked to your death under shocking conditions. The Japanese did the same on the 'Burma railway for instance on a smaller scale. But the Nazi 'extermination' camps of which there were at least 5 in Poland (Six if you count the Auschwitz divide) were there specifically to murder up to ten thousand people per day. For instance, the commandant of Treblinka was threatened to be taken in front of a Nazi 'Police court' because he was disorganized after a riot had broken out when people discovered what was happening there getting of the trains at one stage, consequently these people were shot at from all angles and the trains incoming had to be halted until the mess was sorted out. It left a lot of dead people lying all over the place in the camp for quite some time._http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20100402215256AAskAMt



Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The "fact" as Unkotare uses it is historically and culturally inaccurate.
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 19, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Yup, yes, you are.  You would receive an F in a college class for your repeated misuse of the word.



You may recall that I've already told you I've used the term ACCURATELY in classes attended and taught, in graduate school and a variety of other educational settings.  


No matter how many times you repeat this nonsense, you will not be one bit less in error, you ignorant turd.


----------



## Skull Pilot (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



A public school textbook is chosen by a biased politically driven school board and a biased and politically driven federal bureaucracy

And you're surprised they force you to read biased and politically motivated material?

Here's a tip go the the library and read on your own if you want to learn anything of value don't let some government employee tell you what and how to think. Government run schools do not have your best interests at heart all they care about is their own agenda of producing flocks of compliant sheep.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

That is obviously not true, Unkotare.  But I will send it off to three history professors I know, two libs and one con, and see what they say.  I will share the answers with the board.  I think you do not understand that FDR or anyone else using that term before the end of the War and the discovery, the full discovery, of the German camps, would not equate the two, with full knowledge.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 19, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> That is obviously not true, Unkotare. .





Of course it is, you ignorant turd. Words mean something, even if YOU are too stupid to understand them.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 19, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Yup, yes, you are.  You would receive an F in a college class for your repeated misuse of the word.
> ...



But isn't it entertaining to be confidently told what would happen in a college class by someone who wouldn't be allowed in to empy the trash cans?


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 19, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > That is obviously not true, Unkotare. .
> ...



You're talking to someone who thinks "obviously not true" means "doesn't agree with my worldview".


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 19, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...



Must spread!


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

Not all world views are equal, CeCi, as you prove to your debit almost daily.



Cecilie1200 said:


> Unkotare said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


----------



## regent (Nov 19, 2012)

Was the high school textbook named? I have the feeling, if the quotes are accurate, they may have been taken out of context. Take the word hostile in one example, was that referring to a law, rule or California propostion that indicated the hostility of some people and not the authors bias? If the bias were true, and there is always some, why did the district or state adopt the text? Chances are the teacher may not have selected the text. Bias is more prevalant in the state and district administration than in the teachers. 
If it is an AP class chances are good that the teacher is a history major. At times schools have music teachers, or coaches teaching academic subjects. Classes have to be covered.   
And that brings up a bigger question, should history be taught as history in the high school, warts and all, or as a means to promote patriotism, love of country and heros? 
We can be thankful that the Texas GOP has passed a resolution prohibiting the teaching of critical thinking in Texas schools. Did the state of Texas follow the GOP suggestion?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay...I'm not sure whether to be offended or think that you actually agree with me that they're is bias going on here.  Tell me, specifically why am I wrong about these parts of my textbook being biased and incorrect?



Ignore Jillian. Her contribution to society is sitting on the sofa in her trailer, eating bon-bons and watching MSNBC. 

Skilled workers enter the United States on a H-1B Visa. It is a simple matter to determine the number of entrants based on type. 

The #1 type of legal entry is the BCC - boarder crossing card, granted to Mexican citizens. B-1 follows, which is business visitors. Neither of these are permanent Visas, though a lot turn out to be permanent. Next is F - foreign exchange students. This is the second largest pocket of illegal immigration. Most legal, permanent immigrants come through on a C Visa, which is unskilled labor simply migrating.

Types of Visas for Temporary Visitors

So again, Jillian is a moron with an IQ of perhaps 40, ignore her. Your book is completely biased and devoid of fact.

What is the book, if you don't mind me asking?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

jillian said:


> no. he SHOULD listen to me.



No one should listen to you, ever.



> we can have a myriad of different opinions.



If he wants your opinion, he can turn on MSNBC.



> there is only one set of facts.



Which you ignore.



> don't encourage ignorance.



We're not, which is why it's best to avoid you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

To some history profs whom I know.  I sent this over earlier in the morning.  "Would any of you feel comfortable using the term "concentration camp" when teaching about the American internment camps for Japanese-Americans?"

(Jake Starkey) If were teaching I would explain the difference between the two, and tell my students that when FDR used the former term, it had not yet acquired the taint of the Nazi camps.

(Dev) Concentration camp is_ a correct term_ to use, but it is _also a loaded term based on the Nazi camps_.  It is possible students _might equate what Hitler did to what Roosevelt did_.  _Both were reprehensible, but not equal_.  So to answer your question, I personally probably would not use the term in relation to Japanese-Americans.

(Michael) I always tell the students the differences between a Nazi concentration camp and an American internment camp for Japanese Americans in WW2.


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 19, 2012)

bripat9643 said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...



I wonder if you, and a few others, think your responses are age apropriate for someone who professes to be 14?

Kid, i stick to my recommendation that you do your own research. Perhaps not only talk to your teacher, but your parents as well.

I also recommend that you not allow some of the more bitter posters to effect you. They are hate filled, and clouded by their own bias, and that's no way to go through life.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> I wonder if you, and a few others, think your responses are age apropriate for someone who professes to be 14?
> 
> Kid, i stick to my recommendation that you do your own research. Perhaps not only talk to your teacher, but your parents as well.
> 
> I also recommend that you not allow some of the more bitter posters to effect you. They are hate filled, and clouded by their own bias, and that's no way to go through life.



Challenging the status quo often is replete with consequence. Many teachers will retaliate for ideas that fall outside the dogma being taught. 

My son was in IB (International Baccalaureate) and had one history teacher who was an open and proud communist, who enjoyed a lively debate. He had another teacher in International Studies, who was far left (denied being a communist) who did retaliate to the point that we took it to the review board, and the communist teacher supported us. So there is a danger, particularly in AP, where there is no review board or appeals process.


----------



## regent (Nov 19, 2012)

Perhaps by high school time students can cope with, not approve of, bias in the classroom? Schools are political institutions, filled with people from school boards, administrators, teachers and parents all with political leanings. Can those leanings be eradicated for education? 
Do we not vote for school boards that match our politics, school boards that often hires teachers because of their politicial leanings. In fact, at one time a new school board often meant a total change of teachers to fit the politics of the new school board, hence tenure.


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 19, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > I wonder if you, and a few others, think your responses are age apropriate for someone who professes to be 14?
> ...



I would never suggest all teachers are good teachers, or open to debate. However since he's said this teacher is one of his favorites, and this class is an advanced class, I suspect brushing off the teacher as an "evil liberal whose sure to ruin you if you go agaisnt their propaganda machine", which some posters seem to feel, is not the right call.


In all honestly, I know this is a political board, and we all enjoy sparing with the other guy, but if this is a 14 year old kid seeking advice, do we really want that advice to be so bitter and resentful against someone who you think may have differing views from you?


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

AmyNation said:


> I would never suggest all teachers are good teachers, or open to debate. However since he's said this teacher is one of his favorites, and this class is an advanced class, I suspect brushing off the teacher as an "evil liberal whose sure to ruin you if you go agaisnt their propaganda machine", which some posters seem to feel, is not the right call.
> 
> 
> In all honestly, I know this is a political board, and we all enjoy sparing with the other guy, but if this is a 14 year old kid seeking advice, do we really want that advice to be so bitter and resentful against someone who you think may have differing views from you?



I don't think my advice was bitter and resentful. Like I said, we encountered one teacher who self-identified as a Marxian, who was very open to dissenting ideas. Not everyone on the left is closed minded and bigoted, just the overwhelming majority are.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

I don't think PoliticsKid is 14, but advice, such as the teacher being an "evil liberal whose sure to ruin you if you go agaisnt their propaganda machine" is such specious advice that even if PK is 14, he will ignore it and eventually go to the teacher with any concerns.


----------



## Truthmatters (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



Your coming from a preprogrammed mindset


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> Your coming from a preprogrammed mindset



Well, not everyone can be as open minded as you, Jakematters.....


----------



## del (Nov 19, 2012)

obvious rubes are obvious


----------



## Truthmatters (Nov 19, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > Your coming from a preprogrammed mindset
> ...



When has anything you ever predicted about the effect of policy come true?


You dont KNOW what propaganda is


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> When has anything you ever predicted about the effect of policy come true?



I'm sure that somewhere in your diseased mind, this is a really clever "gotcha.."



> You dont KNOW what propaganda is



I admit that I don't spend my days on MSNBC being programmed with propaganda, like you do, Jakematters.


----------



## Truthmatters (Nov 19, 2012)

Dear Idiot,


when have you EVER been proven correct in your accessments of the effect of policy?

You and the republican party have been proven wrong on what you claimed the effect of policy would be.


Let me make this simple for you.


You and Your party have been proven historically wrong in the ideas you put forward.

You insist we use failed ideas.


You were voted down for just that reason.


----------



## Rat in the Hat (Nov 19, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> Dear Idiot,
> 
> 
> when have you EVER been proven correct in your accessments of the effect of policy?
> ...



And you have been proven hysterically wrong in the ideas you put forward, Fatso.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

Rat in the Hat said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > Dear Idiot,
> ...



Have you ever sat back and wondered, "just what the fuck is the concept Truthmatters is trying to convey?" I do that with my dog sometimes, try to figure out what she's thinking. Yeah, the dingo has quadruple the IQ points of Jakematters, but the concept is the same...


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

regent said:


> Was the high school textbook named? I have the feeling, if the quotes are accurate, they may have been taken out of context. Take the word hostile in one example, was that referring to a law, rule or California propostion that indicated the hostility of some people and not the authors bias? If the bias were true, and there is always some, why did the district or state adopt the text? Chances are the teacher may not have selected the text. Bias is more prevalant in the state and district administration than in the teachers.
> If it is an AP class chances are good that the teacher is a history major. At times schools have music teachers, or coaches teaching academic subjects. Classes have to be covered.
> And that brings up a bigger question, should history be taught as history in the high school, warts and all, or as a means to promote patriotism, love of country and heros?
> We can be thankful that the Texas GOP has passed a resolution prohibiting the teaching of critical thinking in Texas schools. Did the state of Texas follow the GOP suggestion?



Eh, what?   The book is called An Introduction to Human Geography, if you'd like to know.   Anyway, in that instance, it's not just the word "hostile" I think is an indicator of bias, it's also the fact that it lumps illegal immigrants in with legal ones, which is a very liberal point of view.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Eh, what?   The book is called An Introduction to Human Geography, if you'd like to know.   Anyway, in that instance, it's not just the word "hostile" I think is an indicator of bias, it's also the fact that it lumps illegal immigrants in with legal ones, which is a very liberal point of view.



Interesting; Rubenstien is usually regarded as apolitical. This book has been around for decades, I've not heard anything negative in the past about it.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> ...



On the first point, actually no they are talking about all  immigration, not just legal immigration.   That aside, just 30% of LEGAL white immigrants and only 9% of naturalized Hispanics are college educated.   I don't think you ca call most immigrants "well educated".   That's just plain incorrect.

Regarding the terrorists,   I totally agree they don't represent the views of the vast majority of Muslims.   But my point is the book is incorrect in saying they did it just because they wanted to "preserve their culture".   They did it because their far extremist version of the Muslim religion says that it's the right thing to do.   It's not demeaning Muslims to say that, unless of course they belong to Al Quaeda's denomination, or the textbook writes it poorly and leaves out the word "extremist".  The textbook should have included their religious beliefs, as they are very relevant motives of the attacks.

On the last point about illegals receiving public services, regardless of what YOU think, most people who are asked would say that illegals shouldn't receive public schooling.   They're is a big debate on this issue and this textbook is portraying the people who voted against public services for illegals are wrong. That is advocating a political opinion, and is only half the story, and has no place in a public school textbook.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

Truthmatters said:


> Dear Idiot,
> 
> 
> when have you EVER been proven correct in your accessments of the effect of policy?
> ...



Umm, Excuse me?  I'm for intelligent debate, if I wanted to be yelled at with no basis I would have taken up debating with kids at my high school; I sorta thought the people on debate websites would understand that you don't get anywhere with your ideas if you demean everyone while sharing them.

And, no, for the most part, we have been right.   Look at Lincoln.   Look at Eisenhower.   Look at Reagan.

Now do you want to do a proper response and tell me where I'm going wrong on saying my textbook is biased, or just act like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi's propaganda engines?


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Eh, what?   The book is called An Introduction to Human Geography, if you'd like to know.   Anyway, in that instance, it's not just the word "hostile" I think is an indicator of bias, it's also the fact that it lumps illegal immigrants in with legal ones, which is a very liberal point of view.
> ...



I have the eighth edition, if you're curious.  I might post photos when I get the chance, that we don't have that whole "context" argument.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 19, 2012)

Well the concern troll kid is simply repeating the mantra.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Well the concern troll kid is simply repeating the mantra.



Why do you seem to think that because I'm younger than you, I'm incapable of critical thinking?   Do you deny that my original post here took some independent thought?


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 19, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> I do that with my dog sometimes, try to figure out what she's thinking....



Well at least you're at the right level...


----------



## Annie (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Truthmatters said:
> 
> 
> > Dear Idiot,
> ...



We've no proof of it, but seems one thing both the right and left agree with in general, TM is brain damaged, just ignore.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Also, here's a paragraph that attempts to briefly describe the motives of the 9/11 terrorists, linking it to opposition of globalization:
> 
> "A much more extreme opposition to globalization led to the attack by al-Qaeda terrorists against the United States on September 11, 2001, with support of the Taliban then in control of Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda selected targets- the World Trade Center and the Pentagon-they considered especially visible symbols of US domination of globalization trends in culture, politics, and economy. Afghanistan's Taliban leaders justified such actions as banning television and restricting women's activities as consistent with local traditions, and such punishments as public floggings and severing of limbs as a necessary counterbalance to strong forces of globalization."
> 
> Okay, there's nothing factually wrong here, I just think it left out a very important detail.   It didn't mention the Taliban's and al-Qaedas religious beliefs, which are a very important detail to include because they pretty much control they're behavior.   They  don't restrict women's activities to stay consistent with "local traditions", as my textbook claims, they do it because of they're radical beliefs!



Their local traditions are their radical beliefs. Their traditions go back 1200 years. So no, it is not wrong. 

I think the opposition to globalisation is pretty close to the mark, but I would put it more succinctly - they are pissed off at the US interferring in their part of the world, by either propping up, or enabling, tyrannical regimes..


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Umm, Excuse me?  I'm for intelligent debate, if I wanted to be yelled at with no basis I would have taken up debating with kids at my high school; I sorta thought the people on debate websites would understand that you don't get anywhere with your ideas if you demean everyone while sharing them.
> 
> And, no, for the most part, we have been right.   Look at Lincoln.   Look at Eisenhower.   Look at Reagan.
> 
> Now do you want to do a proper response and tell me where I'm going wrong on saying my textbook is biased, or just act like Obama, Reid, and Pelosi's propaganda engines?



Lincoln and Eisenhower would not recognise the repub party of today. And you can probably lay the blame -that's right, blame, not kudos - squarely at the feet of Raygun as to why your party is so unpopular these days..


----------



## lizzie (Nov 19, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


 
You aren't wrong, and now you see why you find bias in textbooks. They are written with ideology and agenda in mind, rather than objective facts.


----------



## Politicskid (Nov 19, 2012)

Annie said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Truthmatters said:
> ...



He needs a new name.  How about "Propaganda Matters"?


----------



## daveman (Nov 20, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Umm, Excuse me?  I'm for intelligent debate, if I wanted to be yelled at with no basis I would have taken up debating with kids at my high school; I sorta thought the people on debate websites would understand that you don't get anywhere with your ideas if you demean everyone while sharing them.
> ...



Yes, the GOP is so unpopular it lost the White House by only a few percentage points, and kept the House.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 20, 2012)

Deflection, concern troll, does not work on this Board well.



Politicskid said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Well the concern troll kid is simply repeating the mantra.
> ...


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 20, 2012)

Actually, . . . WH: 2mm plus votes and 332 to 206 EC, and added two seats to the Senate for the Dems.

Stay accurate, slim, yes, it was a mandate for Bush in 2000 and Obama today.

Obama is office because of folks like you, daveman, who hurt our candidate's chances.



daveman said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 20, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Why do you seem to think that because I'm younger than you, I'm incapable of critical thinking?   Do you deny that my original post here took some independent thought?



No worries, it's Jakematters who is incapable of thought.


----------



## Uncensored2008 (Nov 20, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Well at least you're at the right level...



If I want to communicate with a dumb animal, I post with you...


----------



## daveman (Nov 20, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Actually, . . . WH: 2mm plus votes and 332 to 206 EC, and added two seats to the Senate for the Dems.
> 
> Stay accurate, slim, yes, it was a mandate for Bush in 2000 and Obama today.
> 
> Obama is office because of folks like you, daveman, who hurt our candidate's chances.


Yes, and we all know you had a tingle down your leg when Mitt conceded.

Obama boot-licker.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 21, 2012)

Says the champion nose-diver of the AF.  



daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Actually, . . . WH: 2mm plus votes and 332 to 206 EC, and added two seats to the Senate for the Dems.
> ...


----------



## daveman (Nov 21, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Says the champion nose-diver of the AF.



See, you can't even make up interesting insults.

Dumbass kid.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 21, 2012)

Don't have to.  As scum is, scum does, and you daveman are extremist right scum.


----------



## Ernie S. (Nov 21, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Why do you seem to think that because I'm younger than you, I'm incapable of critical thinking?   Do you deny that my original post here took some independent thought?
> ...



Fake hates any thought that isn't completely devoid of conviction.I have far more respect for a hopeless Liberal like Jillian, than I do for Fake. At least she is firm in her convictions. Fake is firm only in his desire to be without convictions at all.
I call people like him, "radical Moderates"


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 21, 2012)

You are a far right wack extremist, whose political philosophy is not worth much more than a second's consideration.

I am firm in my conviction to help rid the GOP of the haters and their nonsense threatening to turn a great party into a skid row imitation of it, drunken and stumbling along.



Ernie S. said:


> Uncensored2008 said:
> 
> 
> > Politicskid said:
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> I am firm in my conviction to help rid the GOP of the haters and their nonsense






You are firmly full of shit, democrat.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

Thus we see the mediocrity and nonsense from one of the silly haters on the extreme edge of our GOP.  Martinez, Boehner, Rubio, Christie, Jindall, and the rest are saying you guys have to change, that we will not be the "party of stupid", anymore.  Either change or you will be dismissed.  Probably the later, because haters hate.

Now watch Unkotare post something very foolish below.



Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > I am firm in my conviction to help rid the GOP of the haters and their nonsense
> ...


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Thus we see the mediocrity and nonsense from one of the silly haters on the extreme edge of our GOP.




There is no "our GOP" as far as you are concerned, Lefty. Nobody is buying your little act, so you are only performing for yourself.



Your audience is an ignorant fool.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

This is the part that you hate, the truth that "Martinez, Boehner, Rubio, Christie, Jindall, and the rest are saying you guys have to change, that we will not be the 'party of stupid', anymore. Either change or you will be dismissed. Probably the later, because haters hate."

The leadership is telling you to stop or go away.  You cost the good guys the election.



Unkotare said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Thus we see the mediocrity and nonsense from one of the silly haters on the extreme edge of our GOP.
> ...


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

Jake, the Moderates had their way the last 2 Presidential cycles and they're 0-2. The Tea Party stomped Obama and the Dems in 2010, we'll stick with the winning hand.

Thank you for your concern


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

The "moderates" were undermined by you guys.  The party lost because of the far right.  You will never get that chance again in the party nomination.  The far right's day is over, Frank.  Go make your own party.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Well the concern troll kid is simply repeating the mantra.
> ...



The Ref steps in and declares Politicskid winner by TKO

"I had to stop the fight, Jake had no means of defending himself. I've never seen such a savage beat down, in such a short time. It reminded me of the Tyson/Frazier fight" -- The Ref


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> The "moderates" were undermined by you guys.  The party lost because of the far right.  You will never get that chance again in the party nomination.  The far right's day is over, Frank.  Go make your own party.



Moderates Shruted it the last 2 Presidential cycles.

We Nominated the King Of Moderate both times and we're 0-2

Learn from history.

Moderates = Loss

We don't need to be American Neo-Marxist Lite


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> The "moderates" were undermined by you guys.  The party lost because of the far right.  You will never get that chance again in the party nomination.  The far right's day is over, Frank.  Go make your own party.



Undermined? LOL

We've decided to reclaim the Republican Party

We're going out in every district are removing the Starkeys from power


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

Nope, the leadership is telling you to take a hike.  The mainstream of the GOP is telling you to take a hike.  The leadership will speak out against any more Akin candidacies and destroy them like they did his chance for election.  When you talk stupidly, you will be told to shut up, like Christie has told the stupids.  Jindall is correct that we don't need to be a "party of stupid" and haters from the far right.

Your day is over.


----------



## daveman (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> I am firm in my conviction to help rid the GOP of the haters and their nonsense threatening to turn a great party into a skid row imitation of it, drunken and stumbling along.



How are you going to do that, kid?


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

Watch Jindall, Christie, Martinez, Rubio, Will, Kristol, J. Bush, and the others who know so much more than you, daveman.  If you are not ready to go in their direction, you are in for a bumpy, rumpy time.


----------



## daveman (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Watch Jindall, Christie, Martinez, Rubio, Will, Kristol, J. Bush, and the others who know so much more than you, daveman.  If you are not ready to go in their direction, you are in for a bumpy, rumpy time.



Again:  What are you going to do about it, kid?

You should note that your current strategy of whining impotently on the internet has proven to be singularly ineffective.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

It wasn't my hate that caused our party to lose, daveman.  The fools of the far right caused our losses.


----------



## daveman (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> It wasn't my hate that caused our party to lose, daveman.  The fools of the far right caused our losses.


Why are you afraid to answer my question, boy?  

Hint:  Because it highlights your utter powerlessness.  

Got that?  _You can do nothing about those in the GOP with whom you disagree._   You liberal Republicans cannot drive conservatives out of the party, no matter how desperately you want to.

You should switch to the Democratic Party.  That's where you belong.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

I and my colleagues here stomped the TP when it attempted to rise in the summer of 2009. They were warned what would happen if they disrupted the town hall meetings, did it anyway, were handcuffed and led away.  In the three years since then, daveman, the TP and the libertarian wings have not elected anyone to the central committee or got one of their candidates out of the primaries.  So, here, in your neck of the woods, yes, we crushed the far right.

And, in the nation, that is what is happening and will continue to happen, davenman, and we will continue to support that movement.

There is nothing you can do to prevent that.

You have no influence or power.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

The tea party won the Kennedy seat, then the moderates decided they didn't need Tea Party support. Result: fake Indian lunatic is now Senator


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

The TP supported Brown, which terrified the voters into voting for Warren.  I agree that Brown was the better candidate.  The TP terrifies normal people.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

Jake has to lie to  save face

Jake stated the opposite of the facts

Jake in his Democrat district is such a petty tyrant


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

CF is now lying after being made out the fool.

Now, if Kerry takes State or Defense, we can win Brown, without the TP, and easily win.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> This is the part that you hate, the truth that







Stop right there. YOU wouldn't know the truth if it slapped you around like a little bitch, then picked you up and spiked your head through the sidewalk, you lying piece of shit. Go back to the DNC and have them assign you another 'character' to play. This one isn't working for you.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

You have had your comments kicked back in your face for your lies and fabrications all day.

Unko, you are melting and it is truly pathetic.  Sux to be you.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 22, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay, as flattered as I am that you think I seem older, I am only fourteen.  I'm a freshman.   I take the time to use proper grammar because I doubt anybody half intelligent would respond if I didn't.
> 
> The first sentence is in context, it was the beginning of a paragraph, and it outright said it as if it was fact that the majority of all immigrants from everywhere are well educated, which is not at all true.
> 
> ...



Dear PKid: Sorry for the "adults" on this thread who took it upon themselves to use it to criticize each other. I will try to find your posts and replies and respond to those instead.

First, for the point about the motives of the terrorist hijackers:
Because they all died and could not be interviewed, it is left to interpretation.

The textbook COULD have stated this point as "still debated," where Muslim sympathizers blame globalization while Bush and his supporters took the public stance that this was an attack against America's freedom. That would have been more fair, to state the contested views, instead of taking the side of anti-globalization and stating that as "fact," which still shows a bias. Even if you AGREE with the anti-globalization view as the reason for the attack, it is STILL an interpretation, and could have been included "in context" with the public statements that Bush made interpreting the attacks otherwise, and been fair to BOTH views.

Again, I don't expect people to be that fair, much less to be able to express that in textbooks.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 22, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> AmyNation said:
> 
> 
> > If you are actually a 14 year old kid, I would suggest you do your own research and then start a discussion about what you've concluded with your teacher.
> ...



Dear Pkid:
I agree with your taking caution here, and thinking carefully before bringing up anything political with your school. All the cases I have read about in the news of controversies coming out of the classroom all spelled out huge hassles for the students, and I would not want this to interfere with your educational relationships.

Here are some ideas I would ask you to explore BEFORE you say anything:
1. Can you work WITH your teacher to set up a political debate or discussion club at your school, where you are CAREFUL to invite diverse students on all sides of issues, such as including Muslim or pro-liberal students to have equal roles in setting it up so it is "safe."
If the students have a council or club that addresses issues, then in the future, things like this could be brought to the attention of a "peer review" group (supervised by teacher sponsors) so it is not on "one student" targeted as the whistleblower, but the students can hear each other's grievances and defend the right to make complaints or suggestions without fear of reprisal.

2. Can you send a copy of the text and publisher information ANONYMOUSLY to a media watch group or educational lobby group, and let THEM handle it, and totally stay out of it. If this will not be traced to you, could you ask a group that specializes in addressing textbook issues or lobbying the State to take on this issue for you? If this could still be traced back to you, including through this website, then I would not recommend this approach until you are out of that class or out of that school district. I just wouldn't take that chance.

As long as you take an open, all-inclusive approach, I prefer #1 and would encourage you as a politically aware and advanced student to try setting up a peer review council to handle issues that may come up between students or teachers regarding classroom materials.

I would prefer students form their OWN peer groups, with assistance from teachers and parents, to manage input and participation in how to teach religious history, even evolution or creation and prayer or sex ed, or other sensitive subjects that otherwise run into biases of one kind or another.

Why wait for bigger conflicts or lawsuits to escalate?
Why not be honest and form dialogue groups to address the differences we do have and run into EVERY DAY?

I'd rather students take charge and learn how to address conflicts democratically.
If you think your liberal teacher would be cool with this idea, I encourage you to go for it!

Whatever ideas you have to follow up on this, whether writing to a local legislator who may be sympathetic about textbook biases,
or forming your own student club around issues that interest you, feel free to post and get feedback
on how to develop your ideas. 

Thank you for posting, and please continue directing your talents and interests in the most productive ways you can.

Yours truly,
Emily


----------



## daveman (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> I and my colleagues here stomped the TP when it attempted to rise in the summer of 2009. They were warned what would happen if they disrupted the town hall meetings, did it anyway, were handcuffed and led away.  In the three years since then, daveman, the TP and the libertarian wings have not elected anyone to the central committee or got one of their candidates out of the primaries.  So, here, in your neck of the woods, yes, we crushed the far right.
> 
> And, in the nation, that is what is happening and will continue to happen, davenman, and we will continue to support that movement.
> 
> ...


Yep, you're a liberal, all right.  No respect for First Amendment rights, and no tolerance for differing views.


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 22, 2012)

Uncensored2008 said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Well at least you're at the right level...
> ...



Ok, now you would be batting above your level...


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Nov 22, 2012)

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > I and my colleagues here stomped the TP when it attempted to rise in the summer of 2009. They were warned what would happen if they disrupted the town hall meetings, did it anyway, were handcuffed and led away.  In the three years since then, daveman, the TP and the libertarian wings have not elected anyone to the central committee or got one of their candidates out of the primaries.  So, here, in your neck of the woods, yes, we crushed the far right.
> ...



He's in a Democrat district


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 22, 2012)

You're in a government school, and the textbook given to you in a sociopolitical class seems to have an agenda.  Does it really matter if it seems to have a left leaning or right leaning agenda?  I would say, no.  

In the end, you can be sure, the book paints the state as helpful.  If it didn't paint social engineering laws of the left as helpful, it would paint corporatist control mechanisms, with the government choosing winners and losers on the right as helpful.

Do you think that parochial schools teach their students a true history about the Spanish inquisition or Salim witch trials?  Do you think they teach an unbiased account of the reformation?  Come on.

Compulsory education is for schooling.  At your age, it is time for you to be responsible for your own education.  I once heard somewhere, I forget where now, "Get your facts right before you get your questions wrong."  And indeed, you are asking the wrong question.  You have however understood something extremely basic though, and it is this, they are not teaching you fundamentals.  This is what high school should be about.  This is why so many high school students leave school ignorant.  What class is this for?  Human Geography?  Really?  How about they spend some time on actual geography, you know, things that can not be questioned or debated as fundamentally factually.  As you can see, here on this discussion forum, the ADULTS have a hard time with facts.

If you ask any number of people, "Is Barack Obama a natural born citizen?", you will get a myriad of answers.  But there is factually only one answer.  It really isn't open to debate.  And it isn't at all dependent on where he was born.  That is a bloody smokescreen.

From wikipedia;


> Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President. This requirement was intended to protect the nation from foreign influence.
> 
> The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. A 2011 Congressional Research Service report stated
> 
> ...



What does this mean?  It means a natural born citizen is born to a mother and a father who are both citizens of the United States.  Why is this important?  It is important so that who ever becomes the leader of the nation feels an natural allegiance to the land that he or she is the steward of.  It is quite clear what the founders of the constitution had in mind.  If your parents aren't both citizens, why would you feel as much loyalty to the land of your birth in as much as to theirs? 

"Get your facts right before you get your questions wrong."

So to the topic of whether you book has bias, who cares?  The question that should first be asked, is, "Should such a book or this topic be taught in a high school?"

http://vega.jeffco.edu/szak/handouts/BookerBloom.pdf

The answer is a resounding NO.  High school is a place for fundamentals, not higher order thinking on the questions of governance.  In the lower grades, you should be learning about states, their capitols, forms of government, ect.  

In the higher grades, you should all have the reading skills by now to be digesting primary sources.  However, you should not be taught what to think about those sources.  The only thing that should be tested is that you have read those sources.  College is the place where higher ordered thinking is taught.  Some students will go on to other careers where such intellectual debate and thinking is not necessary.  So they should not be conditioned on how to think about such things.

But government schools have become indoctrination camps.  This is why, it matters not whether your textbooks have a "liberal" bias or a "conservative" bias, the state doesn't care.  It only cares that you believe that the state is a necessary component of your life.  Do you?  Do you believe that the State is absolutely necessary to the functioning of your life?  

Of course you do.  You are only fourteen, and by this young age, you have already been indoctrinated to believe in no other way of thinking.  Corporate culture is part of your life blood now.  After all, who will build the roads?  Who will teach the children?  Who will put out the fires?  People are helpless, aren't they?  There are only two things that are sure in life, death and taxes.  (Well, that and compulsory schooling.)

In your case, I would recommend, just read the damn book, memorize it and spit out the answers they want you to.  And keep your head down.  Don't draw attention to yourself, and get out of there with as much of your mind and soul in tact.  It is what I do with my own son.  I tell him, the public schools are for _schooling_ him, my job is to _educate_ him.

_I've never let my school interfere with my education._
~Mark Twain 

http://www.johntaylorgatto.com/historytour/history1.htm

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fvPpAPIIZyo]Pink Floyd -- The Wall [[ Official Video ]] - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Dr Grump (Nov 22, 2012)

emilynghiem said:


> Politicskid said:
> 
> 
> > Okay, as flattered as I am that you think I seem older, I am only fourteen.  I'm a freshman.   I take the time to use proper grammar because I doubt anybody half intelligent would respond if I didn't.
> ...



No, it is not left to interpretation. Bin Laden said he attacked the WTCs because of US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Bush's they 'did it because they hate freedom' what rhetoric and Tosh. 

You might have wanted the Detroit Tigers to win the World Series, they did not. It is either true or not. The text book is correct.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 22, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> No, it is not left to interpretation. Bin Laden said he attacked the WTCs because of US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> Bush's they 'did it because they hate freedom' what rhetoric and Tosh.
> 
> You might have wanted the Detroit Tigers to win the World Series, they did not. It is either true or not. The text book is correct.



OK so the textbook could have explained all that.
That Bin Laden said it was for political support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
That Bush said it was an attack on America's culture of freedom and democracy.
And the Muslim sympathizers said it was an attack on globalization worldwide.

Why not explain this is still debated today?
Because it is! People still do not agree!
If you want to be "politically correct" and inclusive,
then include ALL these viewpoints. That's only fair.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

Are you crazy?  No has the right to create a public disturbance.  No one has the right to scream when someone in a public meeting is speaking quietly and to the point.  I told the lefties as well we would not tolerate disturbance from anyone.

You are not a conservative, one who with a criminal intent pretending to be one.

We did the right thing, without a doubt.





daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > I and my colleagues here stomped the TP when it attempted to rise in the summer of 2009. They were warned what would happen if they disrupted the town hall meetings, did it anyway, were handcuffed and led away.  In the three years since then, daveman, the TP and the libertarian wings have not elected anyone to the central committee or got one of their candidates out of the primaries.  So, here, in your neck of the woods, yes, we crushed the far right.
> ...


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 22, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> Bin Laden said he attacked the WTCs because of US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.


WRONG.

Bin Laden denied attacking the WTC's and the FBI never had him listed for that crime.



> USAMA BIN LADEN: In the name of Allah (God), the most beneficent, the most merciful. Praise be to Allah, Who is the creator of the whole universe and Who made the Earth as an abode for peace, for the whole humankind. Allah is the Sustainer, who sent Prophet Muhammad (saw) for our guidance. I am thankful to The Ummat Group of Publications, which gave me the opportunity to convey my viewpoint to the people, particularly the valiant and momin (true Muslim) people of Pakistan who refused to believe the lies of the demon (Pakistani military dictator General Pervez Musharraf).
> 
> I have already said that I am not involved in the 11 September attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act. Islam strictly forbids causing harm to innocent women, children and other people. Such a practice is forbidden even in the course of a battle. It is the United States, which is perpetrating every maltreatment on women, children and common people of other faiths, particularly the followers of Islam. All that is going on in Palestine for the last 11 months is sufficient to call the wrath of God upon the United States and Israel. There is also a warning for those Muslim countries, which witnessed all these as a silent spectator. What had earlier been done to the innocent people of Iraq, Chechnya and Bosnia? Only one conclusion could be derived from the indifference of the United States and the West to these acts of terror and the patronage of the tyrants by these powers that America is an anti Islamic power and it is patronizing the anti-Islamic forces. Its friendship with the Muslim countries is just a show, rather deceit. By enticing or intimidating these countries, the United States is forcing them to play a role of its choice. Put a glance all around and you will see that the slaves of the United States are either rulers or enemies of Muslims.
> 
> The U.S. has no friends, nor does it want to keep any because the prerequisite of friendship is to come to the level of the friend or consider him at par with you. America does not want to see anyone equal to it. It expects slavery from others. Therefore, other countries are either its slaves or subordinates. However, our case is different. We have pledged slavery to God Almighty alone and after this pledge there is no possibility to become the slave of someone else. If we do that it will be disregardful to both our Sustainer and his fellow beings. Most of the world nations upholding their freedom are the religious ones, which are the enemies of the United States, or the U.S. itself considers them as its enemies.


http://www.public-action.com/911/oblintrv.html


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 22, 2012)

Dr Grump said:


> No, it is not left to interpretation. Bin Laden said he attacked the WTCs because of US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> 
> Bush's they 'did it because they hate freedom' what rhetoric and Tosh.
> 
> You might have wanted the Detroit Tigers to win the World Series, they did not. It is either true or not. The text book is correct.



Dear Dr. Grump and PKid:
Thanks again for your post that is directly on topic to get the thread back on track.

I checked with my boyfriend who is moderate media talk show host, who does favor the conservatives over the liberals. He tends to overlook and dismiss complaints about corporate abuses that are destroying the environment, while specializing in exposing the corruption by liberal politicians and bias in liberal media. So he is not without his biases, because he does not focus on exposing rightwing problems, but he is honest about liberal bias when he sees it.

He said if the textbook did not mention Al Qaeda being behind the attacks, then it is biased.

He said that what Bin Laden said, about the attacks being for "US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia," is only part of the larger statements and overall agenda.  That is true, but is only one PART of a longer list. He said that Bin Laden and the Al Qaeda / Terrorists have been waging attacks on an ongoing basis, so this attack cannot be taken out of that context and blamed on just "US support of certain countries" -- it is part of a longterm war campaign against anyone or any group they deem as "infidels" who are not for Allah.

Any omission or attempt to water that down, such as by not even mentioning Al Qaeda,
is biased and/or excluding information to try to be "politically correct" and not offend Muslims.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 22, 2012)

MisterBeale said:


> Dr Grump said:
> 
> 
> > Bin Laden said he attacked the WTCs because of US support of Israel and Saudi Arabia.
> ...



YES and NO.
I am finding mixed reviews of this, some saying the CIA faked Bin Laden's videos,
and others saying he confessed LATER:

So YES, there were statements of denial
and NO, there were statements of admission made by Bin Laden:
--------------------------------------------------
"Osama bin Laden statements after 9/11

Prior to his death on May 2, 2011, the FBI listed bin Laden as one of the "10 Most Wanted" in connection with several incidents including the USS Cole bombing and the 1998 United States embassy bombings in East Africa. The FBI's "FBI Most Wanted Terrorists" poster does not specifically hang responsibility for 9/11 on bin Laden, instead it only states "Bin Laden is a suspect in other terrorist attacks throughout the world."[56]

Immediately after September 11, 2001 bin Laden praised the attacks, but denied responsibility for them.[57] On September 16, 2001, an Al Jazeera news presenter read a message purportedly signed by Osama bin Laden, in which the following words were stated:

I stress that I have not carried out this act, which appears to have been carried out by individuals with their own motivation.[57][58]

In an interview with Osama bin Laden, published in the Pakistani newspaper Ummat Karachi on September 28, 2001, he stated: "I have already said that I am not involved in the September 11 attacks in the United States. As a Muslim, I try my best to avoid telling a lie. I had no knowledge of these attacks, nor do I consider the killing of innocent women, children and other humans as an appreciable act."[59] There was reportedly no way to prove the e-mail published in Pakistan came from bin Laden. The Taliban denied he had access to any communications.[60][61]

In late October 2001, Al Jazeera journalist Tayseer Allouni conducted an interview with Osama bin Laden which was videotaped. Al-Jazeera refused to broadcast it[62] and terminated its affiliation agreement with CNN[63] due to CNN's broadcasting of the interview on January 31, 2002.[64] In the interview, bin Laden addressed the September 11 attacks, saying

If inciting people to do that is terrorism, and if killing those who kill our sons is terrorism, then let history be witness that we are terrorists ... We will work to continue this battle, God permitting, until victory or until we meet God before that occurs.[65]

In November 2001, US forces recovered a videotape from a bombed house in Jalalabad, Afghanistan which showed a man purported to be Osama bin Laden talking to Khaled al-Harbi. In the tape, bin Laden talks of planning the attacks. Translations from the tape include the following lines:

...we calculated in advance the number of casualties from the enemy, who would be killed based on the position of the tower. We calculated that the floors that would be hit would be three or four floors. I was the most optimistic of them all...We had notification since the previous Thursday that the event would take place that day. We had finished our work that day and had the radio on...Muhammad (Atta) from the Egyptian family (meaning the al-Qaeda Egyptian group), was in charge of the group...The brothers, who conducted the operation, all they knew was that they have a martyrdom operation and we asked each of them to go to America but they didn't know anything about the operation, not even one letter. But they were trained and we did not reveal the operation to them until they are there and just before they boarded the planes.[66]

In late November 2002, a letter attributed to Osama bin Laden and translated by British Islamists surfaced, often called bin Laden's 'letter to America'. It states the motive behind the September 11 attacks as being: "because you attacked us and continue to attack us" and justifies the selection of a civilian target. Itemizing a list of perceived Western wrongdoings, the letter concludes that "the oppressed have a right to return the aggression" and hinted at further attacks. Also included are a list of demands, advice, and a statement of grievances against the American government and its people.[67]

On February 11, 2003, Al Jazeera broadcast an audio tape purportedly from bin Laden.[68]

Shortly before the US presidential election in 2004, in a taped statement, bin Laden publicly acknowledged al-Qaeda's involvement in the attacks on the US, and admitted his direct link to the attacks. He said that the attacks were carried out because "we are a free people who do not accept injustice, and we want to regain the freedom of our nation."[69]

In an audio message that surfaced on the Internet in May 2006 the speaker, who is alleged to be Osama bin Laden, defends Zacarias Moussaoui, who was undergoing a trial for his participation in the September 11 attacks. The voice in the audio message says

"I begin by talking about the honorable brother Zacarias Moussaoui. The truth is that he has no connection whatsoever with the events of September 11th, and I am certain of what I say, because I was responsible for entrusting the 19 brothers&#8212;Allah have mercy upon them&#8212;with those raids, and I did not assign brother Zacarias to be with them on that mission."[70]"


----------



## daveman (Nov 22, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> Are you crazy?  No has the right to create a public disturbance.  No one has the right to scream when someone in a public meeting is speaking quietly and to the point.  I told the lefties as well we would not tolerate disturbance from anyone.
> 
> You are not a conservative, one who with a criminal intent pretending to be one.
> 
> We did the right thing, without a doubt.


Yes, that's what Roosevelt said when he ordered Japanese and Japanese Americans on the west coast put in camps.  

You leftists sure do like to silence dissent, don't you?


----------



## emptystep (Nov 22, 2012)

Your book is awful and a waste of valuable tax dollars. Being way left of liberal I probably agree with most of what your textbook's author implies. However when that person wrote that book they needed to put their own biases aside and teach critical thinking about the topic they were writing about. 

As an example:
"Some of today's immigrants to the United States and Canada are poor people pushed from their homes by economic desperation, but most are young, well educated people lured to economically growing countries"

This is how I read that sentence. "You should not be prejudiced of Americans born in other countries." This is a good thing. "Because most of them are well educated." This is a lie. The end does not justify the means, especially in grade school education.

You are 14 and while not yet wise you are intelligent and capable of being taught the complexities of the world. Not to be is a failure of the public education system in this country.


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 22, 2012)

emilynghiem said:


> and NO, there were _alleged_ statements of admission made by Bin Laden:



Show me the body, some photos, or some DNA, and I'll believe that other stuff they claim about him.  Sure buddy.


----------



## emptystep (Nov 22, 2012)

MisterBeale said:


> emilynghiem said:
> 
> 
> > and NO, there were _alleged_ statements of admission made by Bin Laden:
> ...



He was actually secretly moved to a 1500 acre ranch somewhere to be with his BFF.


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 22, 2012)

> Currently, it is not uncommon for high school teachers to be teaching fields for which they themselves lack serious training. For example, in the 19992000 academic year, 39.2 percent of U.S. high school biology teachers had neither an undergraduate major nor minor in biology. Among high school history teachers, the figure was 55.1 percent.20 A high
> school English teacher can teach English and be considered Highly Qualified by
> merely taking a subject area test, but is not allowed to simply test out of the
> curriculum found in the college of education.



http://vega.jeffco.edu/szak/handouts/BookerBloom.pdf


----------



## AmyNation (Nov 22, 2012)

My 10th grade history class was taught by the football coach. We basically watched Rudy over and over again.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 22, 2012)

False analogy.  You extremists aren't any good at this.



daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Are you crazy?  No has the right to create a public disturbance.  No one has the right to scream when someone in a public meeting is speaking quietly and to the point.  I told the lefties as well we would not tolerate disturbance from anyone.
> ...


----------



## daveman (Nov 23, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> False analogy.  You extremists aren't any good at this.



Me, an extremist?  

It's not me punishing anyone for having dissenting views and enforcing rigid groupthink, Lefty Boi.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 23, 2012)

Fakey gets very uncomfortable when FDR's concentration camps are mentioned.


----------



## Cecilie1200 (Nov 23, 2012)

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > Are you crazy?  No has the right to create a public disturbance.  No one has the right to scream when someone in a public meeting is speaking quietly and to the point.  I told the lefties as well we would not tolerate disturbance from anyone.
> ...



Well, since they never have a leg to stand on in DEBATING their dissenters, that really only leaves silencing them as an option.


----------



## daveman (Nov 23, 2012)

Cecilie1200 said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


And they love to do it.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 23, 2012)

The dissenters are debated, and if the dissenters break the law, they pay for it.

That's the American way.


----------



## emilynghiem (Nov 23, 2012)

Dear PoliticsKid:
After reading these responses, again, I strongly encourage you consider working with this teacher, and possibly an English or Communications/Speech teacher, to set up a student debate club, given your interest and aptitude in this area.

Maybe you can come back and give some pointers to the other people on this thread
how to stay on topic. I thought I was bad about that! Gee Whiz!

Take care, thanks for posting, and I hope
you stay politically involved.

My best advice to you is to listen to the far right AND the far left
media watch groups who criticize the media from BOTH SIDES to catch
ALL the information that is LEFT OUT. If you only listen to the right
complain about the left, or the left complain about the right, you will
miss half of the information that is being filtered out.

If you are going to check out Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck and Larry Elders,
then also listen to Amy Goodman, Pacifica and NPR.  Make friends on all
sides of the religious and political spectrum; and where these agree,
pay attention, and where these disagree, check out all the other sources.


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 23, 2012)

emilynghiem said:


> Dear PoliticsKid:
> After reading these responses, again, I strongly encourage you consider working with this teacher, and possibly an English or Communications/Speech teacher, to set up a student debate club, given your interest and aptitude in this area.
> 
> Maybe you can come back and give some pointers to the other people on this thread
> ...



. . . and realize that all sides are owned, controlled by those who only want you to believe that your personal sovereignty is not your own, but is subservient to the government or the corporations and cartels that run it.  They all want you to believe that more government, more taxes, more programs, and more meddling in international affairs are the solution to the problems of the United States.

The media on the right is produced by corporations.  Not exactly unbiased.  The media on the left is produced by foundations, known for their social engineering goals.  If you are lazy and get your infortainment from either of these sources as emilynghiem suggests, then you will be a pawn, a mere mouth piece for the NWO, and the Jesuits.  Their goals are to strip us of our liberties by dividing us.  They want us to see in each other a threat.  The blacks see in whites a threat.  Women see in men a threat.  Gays see in straights, and fundamental christians are to see in gays, threats.  The secularists and Atheists want to destroy religions, and people in faith are up in arms.  I could go on and on how the elites of the globalists use these left and right gate keepers in media to divide us.  I hear fear and hatred preached to me in both types of media.  The truth?  The elites are every true American's real enemy.  They are the ones gutting our infrastructure, destroying our schools, looting our economy.  But while we are attacking each other, blaming each others ideological "parties" and heroes over foolish distractions, their plans continue unabated. 

I do as emilynghiem suggests, but I do it knowing full well the interests behind the media.
When you do check out "watch dog groups," be mindful.  Most watch dog groups are usually funded by the establishment to give credibility to the very establishment they are watching.  Find out who is funding the watch dog groups.  Sites like "snopes" and "factcheck" cannot be trusted due to who runs them and where they get their support.  Others are much the same.

Many of them all meet at the Harold Pratt House in New York.  It makes no difference if they are outwardly conservative or liberal.  Behind closed doors, people like Hillary Clinton and Dick Cheney, they are the best of friends, laughing at you and I, thinking we are nothing but worthless eaters.  Devising better ways to give us cancer quicker so we can be thrown into the system, generate revenue, and die. 
http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/item/3302-elites-push-government-funded-public-media

If you want the truth about something, you must actively seek it from independent media, not from the gatekeepers who tell you what to think.  It won't be found on the television, and it won't be found on the radio.  It most certainly won't be found in print.  If there is money to be made, or it costs money to disseminate, it is intellectual and mental conditioning.  The only information you can trust is from the people.  Citizen journalists, not left gatekeepers or right gatekeepers.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GUfS8LyeUyM]Leonard Cohen - Everybody knows (live in London, 2008) - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 23, 2012)

MisterBeale said:


> Many of them all meet at the Harold Pratt House in New York.  It makes no difference if they are outwardly conservative or liberal.  Behind closed doors, people like Hillary Clinton and Dick Cheney, they are the best of friends, laughing at you and I, thinking we are nothing but worthless eaters.  Devising better ways to give us cancer quicker so we can be thrown into the system, generate revenue, and die.






Conspiracy Forum - thataway. Try to find a shrink while you're on your way.


----------



## MisterBeale (Nov 24, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> MisterBeale said:
> 
> 
> > Many of them all meet at the Harold Pratt House in New York.  It makes no difference if they are outwardly conservative or liberal.  Behind closed doors, people like Hillary Clinton and Dick Cheney, they are the best of friends, laughing at you and I, thinking we are nothing but worthless eaters.  Devising better ways to give us cancer quicker so we can be thrown into the system, generate revenue, and die.
> ...



Whatever. . . 
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LYq3TaBik64]Hillary Clinton admits that the CFR runs the Government - YouTube[/ame]
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOAk-7F1EVU]Cheney on CFR, Council on Foreign Relations - YouTube[/ame]


----------



## daveman (Nov 24, 2012)

JakeStarkey said:


> The dissenters are debated, and if the dissenters break the law, they pay for it.
> 
> That's the American way.



Funny how dissent was patriotic -- until January 20, 2008.

Then it became treasonous.


----------



## HUGGY (Nov 24, 2012)

Politicskid said:


> Okay so I've been thinking for a while now that my AP Human Geography textbook is biased or factually incorrect, but I wanted to see if other people agreed. Let me tell you why I think so. By the way, I'm a freshman in a public high school, so if they're distributing politically biased textbooks, they are acting in an unconstitutional manner.
> 
> Here's one quote from it:
> 
> ...



Your textbook is just ONE source of information.  If you are seriously interested in any subject there are hundreds of sources on any subject you can think of here on the internet and at your public library.  Everyone has some kind of bias.  There is no "conspiracy".  It is up to you to be curious enough in your education process to find several points of view on topics where "opinion" of the author seems unlikely or untrue.  You are only 14.  You are too young to have biases.


----------



## Unkotare (Nov 24, 2012)

daveman said:


> JakeStarkey said:
> 
> 
> > The dissenters are debated, and if the dissenters break the law, they pay for it.
> ...



It wouldn't surprise me at all if it became a criminal offense before the next 4 years are up.


----------



## daveman (Nov 24, 2012)

Unkotare said:


> daveman said:
> 
> 
> > JakeStarkey said:
> ...


It's inevitable when the far left is in control.


----------



## JakeStarkey (Nov 24, 2012)

The loonies are out again.  Amazing.


----------

