Rise in extremism in Idaho is hurting young families and children under 5

[toobfreak]

When is this RW lunacy going to end?

Maybe if you soak your head in a bucket of water, it'll stop.

If I actually thought that would work, I'd give it a go.

You'll never know unless you try.

 

[Mustang]

When is this RW lunacy going to end?

Maybe if you soak your head in a bucket of water, it'll stop.

If I actually thought that would work, I'd give it a go.

You'll never know unless you try.

Speaking of trying, nice try.

 

[Dekster]

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

Our local school system gives free breakfasts and lunches to all students regardless of their ability to pay. They opted into 100% free lunch program because there were too many parents who wouldn't even bother sending in the paperwork so their own child could eat nor would they give them money to eat with. My grandmother who used to be a lunch lady before that spent quite a bit of money out of her pocket paying for children's lunches because their deadbeat/crack addict parents couldn't be bothered to fill out a piece of paper. She felt morally obligated to help them as much as she could afford to.

 

[Mustang]

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

Our local school system gives free breakfasts and lunches to all students regardless of their ability to pay. They opted into 100% free lunch program because there were too many parents who wouldn't even bother sending in the paperwork so their own child could eat nor would they give them money to eat with. My grandmother who used to be a lunch lady before that spent quite a bit of money out of her pocket paying for children's lunches because their deadbeat/crack addict parents couldn't be bothered to fill out a piece of paper. She felt morally obligated to help them as much as she could afford to.

When I was a kid, I ate the hot lunch in the school cafeteria as most students did, except for the kids who did the brown bag thing. I hate to admit it, but I don't know if my parents paid for it or not. However, we were considered affluent in our small town so it's likely my parents paid for it.

What I remember most is that I devoured those meals, and the part I loved best were the hot rolls and butter. I used to go back to get more rolls after all the kids had been served. It's a good and fond memory, but more than that, I know that it saved me from being miserable in the afternoon if I would have had an empty stomach except for water by the time the bell rang to go back to class. Consequently, I have no problem with some of my tax dollars going to feed hungry kids who need to have a full belly if they'll have any chance of learning a damn thing in the afternoon.

Adults can learn to accept suffering of one kind or another. Children should not be forced to endure suffering if there are caring adults who can prevent it. Unfortunately, this thread has revealed that many conservatives are lacking the presence of a humanity gene. Perhaps that's what selfishness does to people when they stop loving their neighbors as thyself.

 

[Concerned American]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

 

[Coyote]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

 

[Concerned American]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

Never said a word about punishing anyone. However, I did state--if the irresponsible parent, who receives public assistance and is STILL unable to provide 3 squares for their children, their children should be removed from their care and offered for adoption--there are lines of people wishing to LOVE & CARE for a child and they would do it without public assistance. We are NOT a communist nation--no matter how much you wish it to be so.

 

[Mustang]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

A wild bear is not a human, and a young dependent child is not a man. Do I need to state anything else that is otherwise glaringly obvious to the average person?

 

[Coyote]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

Never said a word about punishing anyone. However, I did state--if the irresponsible parent, who receives public assistance and is STILL unable to provide 3 squares for their children, their children should be removed from their care and offered for adoption--there are lines of people wishing to LOVE & CARE for a child and they would do it without public assistance. We are NOT a communist nation--no matter how much you wish it to be so.

You are proposing removing children from families simply because they are poor?

If there are "lines of people wishing to love & care for a child" why is the foster care system straining at the seams? Why are so many children waiting to be adopted - not?

 

[Mustang]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

Never said a word about punishing anyone. However, I did state--if the irresponsible parent, who receives public assistance and is STILL unable to provide 3 squares for their children, their children should be removed from their care and offered for adoption--there are lines of people wishing to LOVE & CARE for a child and they would do it without public assistance. We are NOT a communist nation--no matter how much you wish it to be so.

It already happens in many cases, but it's often foster care unless the courts negate parental rights. And guess what happens with foster care? The state pays foster parents a fee to offset the cost of caring for the child. That's still less costly than caring for children in the orphanages of the past where children could be abused.

 

[Concerned American]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

A wild bear is not a human, and a young dependent child is not a man. Do I need to state anything else that is otherwise glaringly obvious to the average person?

Yeah, and according to you, neither are their parents and the innocent children should be removed from the abusive household and given to parents who won't abuse them. You are PROMOTING THE ABUSE by throwing money at the problem to assuage your conscience. You earlier mentioned the cost of keeping someone in prison--apparently you have not researched the number of children who were raised on welfare and social programs that ended up in prison. That is GLARINGLY OBVIOUS TO the average THINKING person.

 

[Concerned American]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

Never said a word about punishing anyone. However, I did state--if the irresponsible parent, who receives public assistance and is STILL unable to provide 3 squares for their children, their children should be removed from their care and offered for adoption--there are lines of people wishing to LOVE & CARE for a child and they would do it without public assistance. We are NOT a communist nation--no matter how much you wish it to be so.

You are proposing removing children from families simply because they are poor?

If there are "lines of people wishing to love & care for a child" why is the foster care system straining at the seams? Why are so many children waiting to be adopted - not?

Some sources estimate that there are about 2 million couples currently waiting to adopt in the United States — which means there are as many as 36 waiting families for every one child who is placed for adoption. American Adoptions - How Many Couples are Waiting to Adopt a Baby?

 

[Concerned American]

presence of a humanity gene

Kind of like feeding the bears in Yellowstone--that is cruelty, because you do not teach self sufficiency which is what you communists lack. Have you never heard the old saw about giving a man a fish and feeding him for a day as opposed to teaching him to fish and feeding him forever? Wake up moron.

So I guess you're ok with punishing kids because their parents aren't sufficiently self sufficient.

Never said a word about punishing anyone. However, I did state--if the irresponsible parent, who receives public assistance and is STILL unable to provide 3 squares for their children, their children should be removed from their care and offered for adoption--there are lines of people wishing to LOVE & CARE for a child and they would do it without public assistance. We are NOT a communist nation--no matter how much you wish it to be so.

It already happens in many cases, but it's often foster care unless the courts negate parental rights. And guess what happens with foster care? The state pays foster parents a fee to offset the cost of caring for the child. That's still less costly than caring for children in the orphanages of the past where children could be abused.

And yet you fail to see how addressing the adoption problem would be more successful than just throwing more good money after bad with the failed public assistance programs.

 

[beautress]

When is this RW lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simply so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

America's forbears initially sent their children to schools located in their respective churches. Local communities still have churches with school rooms for God's children from cradle to grave.

Taxes are now extracted from city and county properties that fund separate schools which gives schools more power than the parents. What a setup are public schools for Communist takeover.

 

[fncceo]

Rise in extremism in Idaho

 

[Dana7360]

Idaho is turning into a jewel. One of the few sane states. If we did not have a communist based federal government wanting to indoctrinate children it might be different. But we do.

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

The money was from a $6 million grant passed by the Trump administration, not a long-term commitment. Republican elected representatives support it. It sounds like it's only RW extremists who don't even have any small children who are against it. They're a bunch of RW lunatics who have let their imaginations run wild and are getting some kind of a sick kick out of causing chaos while unnecessarily hurting young parents and young preschool children.

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

So the welfare payments and snap coupons are not enough, eh. No, I DON'T BELIEVE IN COMMUNISM. I believe in personal responsibility--you should try it sometime--FUCKING PARASITE.

Well, I support myself without any gov't assistance whatsoever.

However, when it comes to public policy, it's a well known fact (at least it is for educated people) that rudimentary gov't programs can and do prevent much higher social and taxpayers costs later on down the line.

That hasn't been the case so far.

Sure it has. That's because the cost of keeping a person in prison for a whole year is VERY expensive.

Not just prison but the public assistance need will grow.

If a person can't go to work because they don't have child care, they are on public assistance.

It's incredible that the trump people don't know this.

 

[Dekster]

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

Our local school system gives free breakfasts and lunches to all students regardless of their ability to pay. They opted into 100% free lunch program because there were too many parents who wouldn't even bother sending in the paperwork so their own child could eat nor would they give them money to eat with. My grandmother who used to be a lunch lady before that spent quite a bit of money out of her pocket paying for children's lunches because their deadbeat/crack addict parents couldn't be bothered to fill out a piece of paper. She felt morally obligated to help them as much as she could afford to.

When I was a kid, I ate the hot lunch in the school cafeteria as most students did, except for the kids who did the brown bag thing. I hate to admit it, but I don't know if my parents paid for it or not. However, we were considered affluent in our small town so it's likely my parents paid for it.

What I remember most is that I devoured those meals, and the part I loved best were the hot rolls and butter. I used to go back to get more rolls after all the kids had been served. It's a good and fond memory, but more than that, I know that it saved me from being miserable in the afternoon if I would have had an empty stomach except for water by the time the bell rang to go back to class. Consequently, I have no problem with some of my tax dollars going to feed hungry kids who need to have a full belly if they'll have any chance of learning a damn thing in the afternoon.

Adults can learn to except suffering of one kind or another. Children should not be forced to endure suffering if there are caring adults who can prevent it. Unfortunately, this thread has revealed that many conservatives are lacking the presence of a humanity gene. Perhaps that's what selfishness does to people when they stop loving their neighbors as thyself.

Your parents probably had an arrangement with the cashier, especially if you were not charged at the time of your seconds. My parents just mailed a check to the school once a month and they settled up at the end of the month for any credit due to missed days or whatever. If I wanted extra anything, that was cash on the barrelhead. In high school it was different. We could go out to lunch if we wanted, eat standard cafeteria fare, buy a la cart from the school's version of a snack bar or buy from food cart set up in which chain restaurants rotated supplying with a limited menu of their more popular items like burgers, hotdogs, sandwiches, pan or sliced pizzas. The last 3 (open lunch, snack bar, and carry-in) no longer exist and my high school has had to go from 2 to now 4 lunch periods to be able to push all the students through the standard cafeteria lines (it has 2, one on each side)

 

[Orangecat]

Ok so you don't want women to have access to reliable and affordable contraception.
You don't want women to have access to a safe abortion.
You don't want to pay anything in public assistance, even food.
You don't want to provide any assistance to help women find a job.
You don't want to provide any assistance for a woman to get any training or education to be able to find a job.
And you don't want women to have child care so they can go to a job to feed that child she has.
So you want to add more women and children to being homeless in our nation.
Don't complain about homelessness and crime. You caused it.

 

[Concerned American]

Idaho is turning into a jewel. One of the few sane states. If we did not have a communist based federal government wanting to indoctrinate children it might be different. But we do.

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

The money was from a $6 million grant passed by the Trump administration, not a long-term commitment. Republican elected representatives support it. It sounds like it's only RW extremists who don't even have any small children who are against it. They're a bunch of RW lunatics who have let their imaginations run wild and are getting some kind of a sick kick out of causing chaos while unnecessarily hurting young parents and young preschool children.

When is this lunacy going to end? It's like a bad dream that just won't end. I mean, this is not a battle for the soul of America as its most vocal opponents have described it. It's child care for young children who are not in school yet simple so their parents can go to work, earn a living, and put food on the table at dinner time. How can that possibly be controversial?

---------------------------------------------------

In the months since a Republican house of representatives member first brought the grant for early childhood education to the legislature for a vote, far-right opponents have insisted, despite evidence and assurances proving otherwise, that the grant would be used to “indoctrinate” children five and under, and turn them into social justice activists.

Supporters of the grant include the state’s two Republican senators and its business lobby, but the most vocal opponents have pitched it as a “battle for the soul of America”.

The real battle, however, appears to be against the influence of fringe voices in Idaho politics. Though seemingly an obscure battle, the intensity of the fight in the state and the blood-curdling language used by its opponents reveals much about American politics in the post-Trump era.

It is a place where conspiracy theories run amok and where even some Republican legislators are at a loss how to combat the extremism of many of their supporters, who have concluded that grant money for educating young children represents a dire threat to their way of life.

Mike Satz, executive director of a new effort to combat extremism in Idaho, the Idaho 97 Project, said: “The politics have really started devolving and the extremists have really started taking control of the Republican party in the state, and now the policies are not for the people – conservative or liberal or whatever the ideology is.”

When it comes to the early childhood grant, the people who would be affected by it are watching and waiting to see if the money will be available to improve access to care – a typical family in the state spends 25% of its annual income on care for an infant and a four-year-old.

A vote in the house on whether or not to accept the money is expected any day. The house initially rejected the funds in early March, but the state senate approved an amended version of the bill by one vote earlier this month.

Supporters have flooded local news with opinion pieces clarifying misconceptions about the grant and explaining exactly how the money would be used, but they face a mountain of misinformation coming from some rightwing lawmakers and the libertarian group Idaho Freedom Foundation (IFF).

The Republican representative Charlie Shepherd provided an insight into this last week, when he told the Idaho Press that he approves of the amended version of the bill after voting against it in March.

Shepherd said that his earlier concerns about “indoctrination” had been addressed, but his constituents were not aware of that change. “And if I cannot educate them on what the bill actually does in time. At this point it’s almost political suicide for me to support the bill,” he confessed.


The amended version of the bill includes language that specifies that the appropriated money “shall not be used to dictate curricula for use by local collaboratives”. That was also true before, but the additional language makes it legally binding.

The executive director of one Idaho collaborative which could receive some of the funds, Andrew Mentzer, said the money would be beneficial for expanding childcare capacity and to help existing providers stay afloat in Valley County, a scenic, rural region in the west central part of the state.

“We lost two childcare facilities in the past 15 months in our area and that put about 50 families in a pretty bad position, during a pandemic, with regard to how and when they can go to work,” said Mentzer, executive director of the West Central Mountains Economic Development Council.

“A lot of the families ended up with situations where they had to cut hours or had a parent who couldn’t go to work, and that’s food on the table at the end of the day for the individual families.”

Already, the community is short 400 childcare slots. “Those are 400 kids whose parents can’t go to work,” Mentzer said.

The people stirring the pot
The grant money would be distributed to local collaboratives like Mentzer’s by the not-for-profit Idaho Association for the Education of Young Children (Idaho AEYC). This group is separate from its national affiliate, the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), a professional membership organization for people who work in education and childcare.

Intensity of Idaho childcare battle shows rise in extremism, post-Trump (msn.com)

The rise in liberal extremism hurts everyone. There's nothing logical or beneficial to any of it.

If you had actually bothered to read the article, it's far RW activists who are insisting that this funding would be used to turn young children in to social justice activists when the reality is the most controversial thing this children would likely be taught is how to build legos toys, or how to color within the lines in a coloring book, followed by a snack and a cup of milk and a midday nap followed by a recess period where they could run and play.

If you had bothered to take the time or understand the world, you'd know that childcare is NOT the responsibility of the Government. Ever. Full stop.

This is NOT extremism. Wanting the taxpayer to pay for the childcare of other people's children IS EXTREMISM.

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

So the welfare payments and snap coupons are not enough, eh. No, I DON'T BELIEVE IN COMMUNISM. I believe in personal responsibility--you should try it sometime--FUCKING PARASITE.

Well, I support myself without any gov't assistance whatsoever.

However, when it comes to public policy, it's a well known fact (at least it is for educated people) that rudimentary gov't programs can and do prevent much higher social and taxpayers costs later on down the line.

That hasn't been the case so far.

Sure it has. That's because the cost of keeping a person in prison for a whole year is VERY expensive.

Not just prison but the public assistance need will grow.

If a person can't go to work because they don't have child care, they are on public assistance.

It's incredible that the trump people don't know this.

You are an ignorant moron, incapable of critical thought and requiring no more attention.

 

[Orangecat]

How about taxpayer subsidized school lunches for children who would otherwise go hungry? Would you just let them go hungry? If so, would you please go to the schools to tell the children yourself.

It must be such a burden to be so virtuous. How do you do it, with OPM or your own?