Blatent form of indoctrination... Should Teacher be fired?

[Pogo]

Looks like it's the parent who needs remedial reading. The quiz question says nothing about politics.

Go ahead, read it.

It's what we get when we elect a narcissistic sociopath. Also this is a vocabulary quiz --- it's asking for an ADJECTIVE.

Always read your own links before you post.

Politicians have nothing to do with politics.
Mkay

Go ahead. READ it. Instead of plugging in shit I never said.

You said its not political when it talks a politicians actions and words.
This is silly pogo.
Are you drunk?

NO, I DID NOT.

Quote me. And quit plugging in what isn't there.

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't? You can't do that -- I always know what I post.

 

[Pogo]

YES obviously 'condescending' is a put-down. The structure of the sentences demands a put-down. What 'condescending' is NOT --- is "political". That's a personal trait.

Get it now?

Oh, poor Pogo. "disgusting: is not political. Until you put it next to a president . Obama is disgusting. Is that political"

Got it NOW?

No it's not "political". You could have caught O'bama picking his nose. Once AGAIN there ain't nothing "political" about that.

POLITICS is political; PERSONAL is not. Smell me yet?

Lemme get this straight --- YOU were a teacher??

Anybody is welcome to post definitions of "condescending", "civil", "precedent" --- or their synonyms that would also have worked --- that denote any kind of "politics" in them.

Most certainly, I smell you.

Let's look at any word. say "balloon" What kind of word is balloon? You say it is a noun. It's a happy noun unless of course you have a fear of balloons.

But it is also a verb. Still a pleasant word, but it depends on how it's used. If someone says their dividends ballooned when the company sold it's subsidiary, it's a Great Happy word. Kind of personal

Then there is the nasty ballooned. Max ballooned when he started drinking and eating burgers and fries. He weighs 280 in less than 6 months! Poor Max.

Do you see you can put a wird kin many categories: happy, sad, nasty, highly personal, not personal at all. It depends on how the word in used.

SMFH....

"Max ballooned when he started drinking and eating burgers and fries. He weighs 280 in less than 6 months! Poor Max."

---- and if "Max" happens to be a politician, THIS ISN'T A POLITICAL STATEMENT. Just as if Max happens to be a taxi driver it's not an "automotive" statement, just as if Max happens to be a doctor it ain't a "medical" statement.

Holy SHIT....

"Political: transcends many facets, usual a positive or negative.

But your last statement let me see exactly where you are coming from. So I a beginning to see the confusion.

Yes, automotive, and medical are generally considered statements. But what makes the difference is the descriptive word being places with a PERsON. Let's look at "disgusting" again. It can't be used to qualify automotive but it can to a "mechanic: and disgusting would not describe medical but it would a doctor.

so, strictly disgusting would not describe political, it would for a politician. Do you see where there is a difference. I understand your logic and it was well intended, it just did not go far enough. Thank you for sharing that with me.

OK, thanks for that word salad. Needs some dressing though.

Do you, or do you not, see the folly of plugging in the automotive aspect or the medical aspect to the hypothetical "Max" ---- when no such association was ever implied?

 

[TNHarley]

Politicians have nothing to do with politics.
Mkay

Go ahead. READ it. Instead of plugging in shit I never said.

You said its not political when it talks a politicians actions and words.
This is silly pogo.
Are you drunk?

NO, I DID NOT.

Quote me. And quit plugging in what isn't there.

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

 

[bodecea]

This is absolutely right out of the Saul Alinsky/Joseph Goebbels manual for continuing education... Get them while their young...

Teacher under fire for slipping anti-Trump question into homework

https://nypost.com/2017/02/16/teacher-under-fire-for-slipping-anti-trump-question-into-homework/

They aren't the worst but will bring out the Snowflakes.

The teacher probably needs a talking to though.

FWIW, I can't figure out what's anti-Republican and anti-Democrat from day to day. Used to be the Republicans were tough on pot. oh well.

Your support of political indoctrination of children is noted.

We all can see who wants to push political indoctrination of children....

 

[Correll]

This is absolutely right out of the Saul Alinsky/Joseph Goebbels manual for continuing education... Get them while their young...

Teacher under fire for slipping anti-Trump question into homework

https://nypost.com/2017/02/16/teacher-under-fire-for-slipping-anti-trump-question-into-homework/

They aren't the worst but will bring out the Snowflakes.

The teacher probably needs a talking to though.

FWIW, I can't figure out what's anti-Republican and anti-Democrat from day to day. Used to be the Republicans were tough on pot. oh well.

Your support of political indoctrination of children is noted.

We all can see who wants to push political indoctrination of children....

And again, we see how the libs have to be unclear, in order to dodge the constant contradictions in their positions.

 

[Pogo]

Go ahead. READ it. Instead of plugging in shit I never said.

You said its not political when it talks a politicians actions and words.
This is silly pogo.
Are you drunk?

NO, I DID NOT.

Quote me. And quit plugging in what isn't there.

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

This whole Cult of Ignorance bullshit is really tedious.

 

[TNHarley]

You said its not political when it talks a politicians actions and words.
This is silly pogo.
Are you drunk?

NO, I DID NOT.

Quote me. And quit plugging in what isn't there.

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

 

[Pogo]

NO, I DID NOT.

Quote me. And quit plugging in what isn't there.

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

BULL. SHIT.
There's nobody whose fucking job transmogrifies everything they say or do into "politics" or whatever they do. If Tommy Lasorda complains about his eggplant parmesean in a restaurant that's not a "SPORTS" comment. If Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Hillary Clinton that's not a "MUSICAL" comment. If Benjamin Spock screams at his wife that's not a "MEDICAL" comment. What the fuck is wrong with you people, thinking you can get away with this tomfoolery?

 

[Jackson]

Pogo, I cannot give more examples that what I have already. That leaves with common sense.

The statement on the test using President Obama was correct because it did not attack him in any way. It was a historical fact.

However, the statement , “President Trump speaks in a very superior and condescending manner insulting many people. He needs to be more humble so that the American people respect and admire him.” are not historical facts, but the writers opinion.

That is why it is wrong. What more can I say?

 

[TNHarley]

Omg your semantics are boring as fuck. You said its not about politics. Are you happy now?
Guess what? A presidents actions and words ARE politics.

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

BULL. SHIT.
There's nobody whose fucking job transmogrifies everything they say or do into "politics" or whatever they do. If Tommy Lasorda complains about his eggplant parmesean in a restaurant that's not a "SPORTS" comment. If Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Hillary Clinton that's not a "MUSICAL" comment. If Benjamin Spock screams at his wife that's not a "MEDICAL" comment. What the fuck is wrong with you people, thinking you can get away with this tomfoolery?

Its talking about his style of politics, you brain dead goober.
This fucking stupidity makes me want to believe in gawd. So, thanks for that.

 

[Pogo]

Pogo, I cannot give more examples that what I have already. That leaves with common sense.

The statement on the test using President Obama was correct because it did not attack him in any way. It was a historical fact.

However, the statement , “President Trump speaks in a very superior and condescending manner insulting many people. He needs to be more humble so that the American people respect and admire him.” are not historical facts, but the writers opinion.

That is why it is wrong. What more can I say?

Whelp, we can say that it's still a vocabulary exercise and as such is aiming for adjectives, not opinions.

In other words the statement ITSELF could have been uttered by anybody, whether one "agrees" or "disagrees" or has no opinion. That isn't the point. The point was what the proper adjective was.


Still finding it deliciously ironic that y'all siding with the illiterate parent are apparently chiding the school for what you think is pointing out the same Rumpian traits that y'all are constantly praising on these same pages --- as if y'all are afraid that this school is going to produce little Rumpbots as a result. You can't cut that irony with a hacksaw.

 

[miketx]

Thank God all my kids are grown!

 

[Jackson]

Pogo, I cannot give more examples that what I have already. That leaves with common sense.

The statement on the test using President Obama was correct because it did not attack him in any way. It was a historical fact.

However, the statement , “President Trump speaks in a very superior and condescending manner insulting many people. He needs to be more humble so that the American people respect and admire him.” are not historical facts, but the writers opinion.

That is why it is wrong. What more can I say?

Whelp, we can say that it's still a vocabulary exercise and as such is aiming for adjectives, not opinions.

In other words the statement ITSELF could have been uttered by anybody, whether one "agrees" or "disagrees" or has no opinion. That isn't the point. The point was what the proper adjective was.


Still finding it deliciously ironic that y'all siding with the illiterate parent are apparently chiding the school for what you think is pointing out the same Rumpian traits that y'all are constantly praising on these same pages --- as if y'all are afraid that this school is going to produce little Rumpbots as a result. You can't cut that irony with a hacksaw.

Anyone taking that test could fill most any adjective that would be more correct that one in the list.

 

[Pogo]

Once AGAIN nothing on the quiz is about "a presidents [sic] actions and words. It's about a PERSON's actions and words.

Unless of course you're prepared to show the class how personal traits are "political". Rotsa ruck on that one.

Why did you try to change my words into what they weren't?

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

BULL. SHIT.
There's nobody whose fucking job transmogrifies everything they say or do into "politics" or whatever they do. If Tommy Lasorda complains about his eggplant parmesean in a restaurant that's not a "SPORTS" comment. If Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Hillary Clinton that's not a "MUSICAL" comment. If Benjamin Spock screams at his wife that's not a "MEDICAL" comment. What the fuck is wrong with you people, thinking you can get away with this tomfoolery?

Its talking about his style of politics, you brain dead goober.
This fucking stupidity makes me want to believe in gawd. So, thanks for that.

Oh? You're actually going to sit on this board and tell us that before his POTUS run Rump never acted out like this?

Oh please... DO go on.

 

[Pogo]

Pogo, I cannot give more examples that what I have already. That leaves with common sense.

The statement on the test using President Obama was correct because it did not attack him in any way. It was a historical fact.

However, the statement , “President Trump speaks in a very superior and condescending manner insulting many people. He needs to be more humble so that the American people respect and admire him.” are not historical facts, but the writers opinion.

That is why it is wrong. What more can I say?

Whelp, we can say that it's still a vocabulary exercise and as such is aiming for adjectives, not opinions.

In other words the statement ITSELF could have been uttered by anybody, whether one "agrees" or "disagrees" or has no opinion. That isn't the point. The point was what the proper adjective was.


Still finding it deliciously ironic that y'all siding with the illiterate parent are apparently chiding the school for what you think is pointing out the same Rumpian traits that y'all are constantly praising on these same pages --- as if y'all are afraid that this school is going to produce little Rumpbots as a result. You can't cut that irony with a hacksaw.

Anyone taking that test could fill most any adjective that would be more correct that one in the list.

And as long as that adjective worked it should get credit.

 

[TNHarley]

Omfg. It is EXACTLY about a presidents actions and words. Read the fucking thing.
It is talking about what they did/do as president.
Ridiculous!

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

BULL. SHIT.
There's nobody whose fucking job transmogrifies everything they say or do into "politics" or whatever they do. If Tommy Lasorda complains about his eggplant parmesean in a restaurant that's not a "SPORTS" comment. If Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Hillary Clinton that's not a "MUSICAL" comment. If Benjamin Spock screams at his wife that's not a "MEDICAL" comment. What the fuck is wrong with you people, thinking you can get away with this tomfoolery?

Its talking about his style of politics, you brain dead goober.
This fucking stupidity makes me want to believe in gawd. So, thanks for that.

Oh? You're actually going to sit on this board and tell us that before his POTUS run Rump never acted out like this?

Oh please... DO go on.

No, im not.
That question clearly implies his political actions as president.
Im done with you. You have given me a migraine

 

[Pogo]

NO, it does not. It's describing how a particular person expresses himself. There's nothing "political" about that.

Again, feel free to show us all how being 'condescending' or being 'civil' ---- are POLITICAL.

As president pogo. As the fucking president. What a president says is.......... POLITICS
The other question was about obama winning the presidency.
Again, are you drunk?

BULL. SHIT.
There's nobody whose fucking job transmogrifies everything they say or do into "politics" or whatever they do. If Tommy Lasorda complains about his eggplant parmesean in a restaurant that's not a "SPORTS" comment. If Ted Nugent threatens to shoot Hillary Clinton that's not a "MUSICAL" comment. If Benjamin Spock screams at his wife that's not a "MEDICAL" comment. What the fuck is wrong with you people, thinking you can get away with this tomfoolery?

Its talking about his style of politics, you brain dead goober.
This fucking stupidity makes me want to believe in gawd. So, thanks for that.

Oh? You're actually going to sit on this board and tell us that before his POTUS run Rump never acted out like this?

Oh please... DO go on.

No, im not.
That question clearly implies his political actions as president.
Im done with you. You have given me a migraine

STILL waiting for someone, anyone, to essplain how "political actions" can be "condescending".

PERSONAL actions certainly can be --- but we already noted that, didn't we.

It appears that what y'all are desperately trying to spin here is the idea that when Rump talks about "Little Marco" or "would anyone vote for that face" or "blood coming out of her wherever" ---- y'all think he does that because of his politics. As opposed to a glaring personality flaw.

NOW do you understand?

 

[koshergrl]

Fire the teacher and end compulsive education.
Let people educate their own children as they see fit, either at home or in small locally controlled schools.

Just like we used to do it, before the Dept. of Indoctrination was created.

 

[Jackson]

Pogo, I cannot give more examples that what I have already. That leaves with common sense.

The statement on the test using President Obama was correct because it did not attack him in any way. It was a historical fact.

However, the statement , “President Trump speaks in a very superior and condescending manner insulting many people. He needs to be more humble so that the American people respect and admire him.” are not historical facts, but the writers opinion.

That is why it is wrong. What more can I say?

Whelp, we can say that it's still a vocabulary exercise and as such is aiming for adjectives, not opinions.

In other words the statement ITSELF could have been uttered by anybody, whether one "agrees" or "disagrees" or has no opinion. That isn't the point. The point was what the proper adjective was.


Still finding it deliciously ironic that y'all siding with the illiterate parent are apparently chiding the school for what you think is pointing out the same Rumpian traits that y'all are constantly praising on these same pages --- as if y'all are afraid that this school is going to produce little Rumpbots as a result. You can't cut that irony with a hacksaw.

Anyone taking that test could fill most any adjective that would be more correct that one in the list.

And as long as that adjective worked it should get credit.

tThe question remains, would that teacher give credit to another answer.

When I was a consultant, I had a teacher give a teacher made test. One question she had, was What happened in 1865? I tried t tell her students could write their great great aunt was born. and She would have to give them credit. Poorly written questions usually are openings for a great many answers, of which would probably be right.

 

[Jackson]

“President Trump speaks in a very superior and enertaining manner insulting many people. He needs to be more motivating so that the American people respect and admire him.”
This ok?