The Glade 4.0

Give it another go. With feeling, this time.

_________________

The people freaking out about charter schools and vouchers.

Germany has a money follows the child model between both public and private schools (also the US DOE considers charter schools public schools).


For the people worried about charter schools and some religious trend. Simple question - what percentage of charter schools have any religious affiliation?


Goodnight.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville

Yeah, I've never fully understood the freak out about private and/or religious schools getting public funds. As you note, Elm, other liberal democracies do it without issue. And even the religious aspect isn't that troublesome to me, though I do think there should be some minimum standards for core curricula (e.g., reading, writing, math, science and history) so in the handful of extreme cases that will inevitably crop up something can be done. At the end of the day, though, if you're a young-Earth creationist and you want to teach your kid about evolution and geology by prefacing the lessons with, "The godless heathens believe that...", be my guest. To be honest, my biggest concern with the move toward private/charter schools is more of a conservative one - i.e., the impact on the political culture from the loss of what was traditionally a major source of local civic involvement. The local school has, for at least a century or so, been one of the main community building institutions in America and one of the most direct interfaces between citizens and government. If half the kids in town end up going to different little charter schools instead of the local high school, what happens to that "rooting for the home team" civic pride?

There has been a report in this thread but since this is Hellfire I am not going to do anything about it. Besides, you're all kind of being assholes and it seems you're okay with that.


There, mod voice. Better?

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.

Seems a little small.

_________________

Can we change the forum description to this?

_________________

If I had a nickel for every time...

You're going to need a bigger font.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

You'd have 8 nickels?

_________________
The Dude abides.

My experience so far is that home team civic pride is more a function of small towns with a single high school that play teams from other small towns. There was certainly none of what you describe when I was in a public school district high school in a city of about a million people. By the time my little brother went through it, the only people showing up to games were mostly students and a smattering of parents.

_________________
The Dude abides.

This.

As someone who received their psychological scarring in a small town of 600, the only possible charter schools in the area are at least half an hour away. People -do- do open enrollment, but usually only when something has gone seriously wrong (teacher with power over a prestigious co-curricular (NHS, frex) takes a personal, intense dislike to you), and I highly doubt there'd be a swarm of people swapping to charter schools as is, because at the point people are open enrolling, the kids have school licenses anyway.

_________________


Grenade 3 Sports Drink. It's fire in the hole.. Your hole!

Within hours of DeVos's confirmation, the IDEA (Individuals with Disabilities Education Act) page was taken down from the Dept. of Education page.

If you have a child with an IEP or a 504 plan you should be scared right now.

If you've ever actually taught in a school where you have to deal with IEPs and "disabilities",(which I have) you know that this needed a gigantic **** taken all over it. Teenagers with behavioral issues quickly figure out how to weaponize the rules to do basically whatever they want in school. IEPs have been a sledgehammer for parents and children to act like unreasonable shitheads for entirely too long.

So yes, people should be scared- that their little toy is being taken away.

You guys can wail about being "scared" all you want, but this isn't about Trump, Pence, or DeVos. You wouldn't have DeVos (who is the weakest of all Trump's nominees) if you hadn't lost so many other elections. It's going to happen. You'd best just lube up.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Stepping back, this is exactly what is wrong with all of the political dialogue in our country right now.

For the last 8 years, instead of telling people who were upset by the system that their opinions mattered and having a discourse, it was a "we know what's best, we're doing it, hang on for the ride".

And now instead of coming from feeling like the system was against you for the last 8 years and reacting with compassion, the current administration (and many people here and elsewhere) don't say "hey, the system really sucks when 48% of our country always feels like they're being run over by the other 52%. Maybe we should try to have discourse and find compromises and common ground".

Instead, they say "You should be scared and you'd best lube up". Because there's nothing like rape references to bring about decent dialogue.

Basically, I'm so tired of hearing everyone use the "someone else was mean first" or "they did it and it was wrong so I'm going to be wrong in the opposite direction" to excuse bad behavior. If something was wrong when someone else was doing it, it's wrong now. Someone else being hypercritical doesn't make you any less hypocritical, it just means you both are.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.

....said every oppressor to the oppressed ever...




We lost the election because people like you whined and ***** and moaned about non-issues with conspiracy theories about Benghazi and email servers, and how Obama was a Muslim who was coming for your guns and your civil rights and stirred up enough ignorant outrage and fear that a large portion of the population of the US was willing to vote for a group of politicians so corrupt and in the pockets of those with big checkbooks right off a cliff while they drag the rest of us with them.

So I intend to go on raising red flags, rabble rousing and expressing outrage, going door to door if necessary.

No, that's not why. That's what shocked liberals who think there's no way rational people could disagree with them believe is the cause.

The election went the way it did for the same reason elections are always won or lost:

A large number of people think a particular person or party will make their life better in the short term if elected.

Trying to make it all about a specific set of issues is ludicrous.

Very few of the people I know voted for a particular person for the same reason- most had a particular issue or set of issues that was important to them, and that's how they voted.

Personally, I vote largely for solid science policy. Others vote for social change, or economic reasons, or to express dissatisfaction.

Belittling someone else for how they voted is stupid and non-productive, and isn't want a democracy is about. Trying to understand why someone voted the way they did, and what is important to them is the way you move forward.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.

You are not wrong in your sentiment, but you are short-sighted.

Here is the challenge you are facing. The left were jackasses during the Obama administration. They, too, were operating under the "someone else was mean first" mentality in response to the right being jackasses during the Bush administration. The right has the same aggrieved party mentality that the left had in 2008, and they've got a mandate to enact their right-wing pogroms the same as how the left had a mandate to enact their left-wing agenda. They're going to do it, and screw you. You deserve it.

You raise a fair argument that two wrongs don't make a right. Unfortunately, to those on the right suffering from Aggrieved Party Syndrome, it just sounds like you're a lefty who wants to get off with trampling all over the right without having to take your lumps, too. It's gotta be tit for tat. I watched the left do this for eight years, so nobody should be surprised at how the right is acting.

If you want to put an end to Aggrieved Party Syndrome, then the left is going to have to do something very uncomfortable. They are going to have to express genuine contrition for their poor behavior during the Obama administration, admit that they were wrong, and accept fault. It will have to be the left that does this, because the right won't. They don't have to. They are now in control of the federal government. What the right has to do is play ball, because if they don't, they won't have control of the federal government for very long.

_________________
Buckle your pants or they might fall down.

It'll never happen. The left feel morally justified in their opinions and behavior, and feel entitled to a world conforming to their world view.

Of course, this is just a conclusion based on empirical evidence, but I'd bet a sizable amount that I'm right, and I'm not a betting man.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Whether or not this is correct, I take issue with the word "just" in your statement. I really wish everyone's opinions in all areas of life were based on empirical evidence. There's no other way to form a correct conclusion apart from blind luck.

_________________
Well Ali Baba had them forty thieves, Scheherezade had a thousand tales
But master you in luck 'cause up your sleeves you got a brand of magic never fails...
...Mister Aladdin, sir, What will your pleasure be?
Let me take your order, Jot it down -You ain't never had a friend like me
█ ♣ █

Obama's second term was honestly pretty **** bad. His last major success was Bin Laden in 2011, the second term was nothing but **** after **** in the Middle East.

I can't really see into the hearts of folks, and I've learned the hard way not to take them at their word. I grew up in deep woods and open pastures and had met probably only a couple of hundred people at most by the time I started high school. I have to watch folks closely and connect the dots - I have a personal flaw of naively assuming others have similar motivation as myself.

_________________
In time, this too shall pass.

Worse, it seems to stem from the same mentality that spawned a "give them an inch and they'll take a mile"- namely, that admitting you didn't love some things about a president and/or your party opens you up to increasing criticism, or that you're essentially admitting everything you did was wrong.

It's become a discussion almost completely played out in stereotypes, generalizations, and caricaturized straw men of the "opposition". People play an extreme against an extreme, and go from one to the other rather than trying to find middle ground.

_________________
Darksiege: You are not a god damned vulcan homie.

But they won't do this. You see, the Left has three kinds of surviving politicians - those who represent areas overrun with rank leftism, and those who survive in areas not so overrun only because they have not had an election cycle yet, and those whose personal popularity is such that they can survive despite not living in a leftist area.

In 2008, Obama was elected to curb the excesses of the Bush administration, especially those involving foreign adventures. Obama recognized this - which is why he kept Robert Gates on as SecDef: Gates recognized the excesses of the administration he represented and was doing his best to extricate the country in a responsible manner.

What Obama, and even more so Reid, Pelosi, and the rest of the Democrats failed to realize was that they had not been elected to allow leftism to simply run rampant. People wanted improvements in healthcare; they did not want "we have to pass this bill to see what's in it", nor did they want "if you like your plan you can keep your plan" when you in fact could not keep your plan. they did not want to hear about a "right side of history" that implied leftism was an inevitable future and that public debate was unnecessary. I will spare the litany of specific instances.

The Democrats were served notice in 2010. In 2012, they were given another opportunity mainly due to Obama's personal popularity with the Senate back in their hands. They ignored it. they were served notice in 2014, again, more firmly. They ignored it again.

The remaining Democrats are now subject to a base that doesn't understand how powerless its remaining politicians really are. It is demanding that they fight and die on every hill, and threatening to primary them if they don't do it.

The problem is that, unlike the Tea Party, that base on the left is busy offending the swing voters that went to Trump as loudly and forcefully as it can. The leftists showing up at rallies do not get that the people they consider dumb racists and bigots get to vote, and those votes count. When the Tea Party had rallies, there was no violence. There was no smashing of windows. Nothing was set on fire. The presence of scary assault rifles proved to be nothing more than a boogeyman, an opportunity for the Left to pretend its opponents were violent and scary.

The Tea Party was harsh with Republicans that failed it, but more importantly it did not offend the swing voter. The swing voter may not have agreed with the Tea Party, but they were not aghast at its antics, just (sometimes) at its policy positions.

The Left gives plenty to be offended at. It complains about "Fears" but protest after protest ends in violence and rioting - and has for 2 or 3 years now. It has an endless appetite for calling people bigots of every stripe. It parades celebrity attention whores in front of the cameras one after the other. It simply demands that swing voters agree with it, lest they suffer condemnation, and does not seem to be aware that the recent "unrest" and "resistance" is nothing of the sort - it is the same pretense that leftism is some unstoppable historical force.

Worse, the average person does not trust the media's fawning adoration of these protests, or these politicians. The media has lost the ability to run interference for leftist excess while excoriating similar behavior on the right. People are not looking at these protests and thinking "Gee, the country is really unhappy with Trump", they are looking at it wondering why these people don't have to go to work, or are not in class like they are supposed to be.

The Left - as in the grassroots leftist political base - is badly overplaying its hand. It is, right now, in a state of absolute hysteria. It is suddenly realizing that Trump is really the tip of the iceberg and it is reacting like a wild animal trying to tear itself loose from the jaws of a bear. It is grasping at anything and everything in the hopes it will somehow destroy Trump with the center, not realizing that they are fatiguing the people they want to convince with wolf-crying and histrionics.

The right is, presently, in very little danger. Its politicians have ample room to break from Trump here and there - a lot of voters on the right really didn't want him. But more importantly, all they have to do is simply point to the liberal base. Schumer is a fundamentally reasonable and intelligent man. His base is not. Worse, he has too many seats to protect in 2018 and his opponents too few. The Democrat that looks at the moment like the sensible voice of moderation, one that could in reality appeal to the country in general is the most vulnerable in 2018 - and if he's somehow primaried out in favor of some "resistance" lunatic, that will only make their defeat in the WV senate race assured rather than likely.

This is not simply 2008 in reverse. When Republican suffered APS, their grassroots movement did not offend anyone except the left, who they had no intention of convincing anyhow, and the press which was already obviously in the left's pocket. They were not setting fires, breaking windows, or anything of the sort. The "violence" even at Trump rallies was trivial or nonexistant compared to what's taken place at leftist rallies over the last few years.

the left has to do what you've said above, but before they can do that they need to climb down from their high horse. They are not going to get back the swing states with pompous lectures from Madonna and Lena Dunham.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."

Said the spoiled brat who thinks "oppression" exists anywhere in the West.



Because Hillary Clinton was totally not in anyone's pocket. You had the most nakedly self-interested politician in recent history at the top of your ticket.

The fact that you actually think this is why the Left lost is actually part of the reason you lost. You lost because you could not appeal to voters that literally do not exist. Had these voters actually existed we'd have never had Obama in the first place. I appreciate your willingness to make stupid excuses thought; it reassures me that there's little to fear next election.



Please, by all means, go for it. I'm sure your message of "you voted against the left because you're a stupid bigot instead of an enlightened cosmopolitan like me" will be incredibly convincing. You are going to go around door to door talking to people that you only understand in terms of your own caricature of them. When they slam the door in your face you will, no doubt, have a reason why it was anything but your own combination of arrogance and undeserved moral superiority.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."