|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
|
On February 19 2015 03:32 Yoav wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 03:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: Wait, you're telling me that the US curriculum currently skips over subjects that paint your country in a negative light?
Is this a nationwide thing or only a few specific states? No, the current AP test portrays the US in a very negative light in many ways. Some nationalists want to change that. Also, generally, almost nothing controversial in the US is nationwide unless it's established by the courts. State-by-state is the usual way of things. AP tests are something of an exception, since they're run by a monopoly. Hardly a conservative one, most would agree.
The current AP test is not required and a different test could be administered, also could you cite an example of what you think on 'the test' is "portray[ing] the US in a very negative light" in an unfair way?
|
On February 19 2015 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 03:32 Yoav wrote:On February 19 2015 03:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: Wait, you're telling me that the US curriculum currently skips over subjects that paint your country in a negative light?
Is this a nationwide thing or only a few specific states? No, the current AP test portrays the US in a very negative light in many ways. Some nationalists want to change that. Also, generally, almost nothing controversial in the US is nationwide unless it's established by the courts. State-by-state is the usual way of things. AP tests are something of an exception, since they're run by a monopoly. Hardly a conservative one, most would agree. The current AP test is not required and a different test could be administered, also could you cite an example of what you think on 'the test' is "portray[ing] the US in a very negative light" in an unfair way?
Did he say it was unfair? The AP test can (and should) be portraying the U.S. in a negative light on many topics, and that would be completely fair. I don't think we should still feel guilty for something our grandfather's grandfathers did, but sugarcoating the past so that you think U.S. history is all puppies and rainbows won't help anyone and just makes nationalism worse. The U.S. participated in its fair share of atrocities, kids should learn about it in school the way it actually happened, and we should all move on and do better.
|
On February 19 2015 06:01 ZasZ. wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 05:16 GreenHorizons wrote:On February 19 2015 03:32 Yoav wrote:On February 19 2015 03:24 WolfintheSheep wrote: Wait, you're telling me that the US curriculum currently skips over subjects that paint your country in a negative light?
Is this a nationwide thing or only a few specific states? No, the current AP test portrays the US in a very negative light in many ways. Some nationalists want to change that. Also, generally, almost nothing controversial in the US is nationwide unless it's established by the courts. State-by-state is the usual way of things. AP tests are something of an exception, since they're run by a monopoly. Hardly a conservative one, most would agree. The current AP test is not required and a different test could be administered, also could you cite an example of what you think on 'the test' is "portray[ing] the US in a very negative light" in an unfair way? Did he say it was unfair? The AP test can (and should) be portraying the U.S. in a negative light on many topics, and that would be completely fair. I don't think we should still feel guilty for something our grandfather's grandfathers did, but sugarcoating the past so that you think U.S. history is all puppies and rainbows won't help anyone and just makes nationalism worse. The U.S. participated in its fair share of atrocities, kids should learn about it in school the way it actually happened, and we should all move on and do better.
Well it just sounded like an objection to a truth so I was seeing if his belief was that it did it in an unfair or intentionally derogatory (for the sake of it) way.
You can't learn a remotely comprehensive history of a nation without stumbling on things that they did wrong or with evil outcomes. So the fact that it happens is nothing to complain about.
EDIT: I was still a bit groggy when I read it so I think I misunderstood his comment. I guess the question would stand for those who oppose a more even handed telling of history.
|
|
On February 19 2015 01:35 oneofthem wrote: this guilt thing is just a rightwing narrative against 'liberal elite education.' been going on since the 1980's.
readers of wf buckley would know
it's been going on a lot longer than that; Richard Hofstadter wrote about it in 1966.
|
(Bloomberg) -- Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker, facing a $283 million deficit that needs to be closed by the end of June, will skip more than $100 million in debt payments to balance the books thrown into disarray by his tax cuts.
The move comes as Walker, 47, mounts a 2016 bid for the Republican presidential nomination, and while his state is under stress from a projected shortfall that could exceed $2 billion in the two-year budget beginning in July.
Delaying the $108 million principal payment due in May on short-term debt would free funds. The move doesn’t require legislative approval, the nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau said in a Feb. 13 memorandum. The terms of the debt sale allow Wisconsin to defer the payment in any given year, a procedure known as a restructuring, without defaulting.
“They need some cash,” said Todd Berry, president of the Wisconsin Taxpayers Alliance, a nonpartisan research group that examines taxes and government spending. “This is kicking the can down the road.”
A spokesman for the Wisconsin Department of Administration said the state is taking advantage of “favorable short-term interest rates” for the restructuring.
“With these types of notes, the maturity schedule and amortization is determined solely by the state, unlike a traditional bond,” said Cullen Werwie.
Werwie also noted in an email that Walker’s predecessor, Democratic Governor Jim Doyle, “utilized similar financial tools.”
Source
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
On February 19 2015 08:26 Mindcrime wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 01:35 oneofthem wrote: this guilt thing is just a rightwing narrative against 'liberal elite education.' been going on since the 1980's.
readers of wf buckley would know it's been going on a lot longer than that; Richard Hofstadter wrote about it in 1966. true. the stuff about liberals trying to brainwash kids into guilt is kind of buckley territory tho
|
Lol, you should have read the primary sources when I posted them. They list out all the documents they wanted the curriculum to include. I can't wait for a liberal blog to do another "gotcha" by pointing out the list include a couple of George W Bush's speeches and try to milk this issue a little more.
|
On February 19 2015 09:02 oneofthem wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 08:26 Mindcrime wrote:On February 19 2015 01:35 oneofthem wrote: this guilt thing is just a rightwing narrative against 'liberal elite education.' been going on since the 1980's.
readers of wf buckley would know it's been going on a lot longer than that; Richard Hofstadter wrote about it in 1966. true. the stuff about liberals trying to brainwash kids into guilt is kind of buckley territory tho
I still remember before I went off to university for the 1st time my conservative grandmother warned me about "those evil liberal professors" and how they will corrupt you etc etc. I like that argument because it implies that everyone who is a scientist and teaches at a university is liberal because I guess conservatives are morons who can't become scientists?
But seriously there are tons of conservative people in academia so I don't get why academia is associated exclusively with liberals.
|
Because some conservatives have become so conservative that they think simply describing reality makes you a liberal.
|
Huh? Academia has significantly more self-identified liberals than conservatives, though the size of the majority varies from department to department. I think the social sciences are the most lopsided, and that's what is most referred to, it seems.
|
To be totally fair, our laws are based pretty heavily on the Ten Commandments. A history curriculum that didn't cover the Ten Commandments would be pretty lacking.
|
Illegal aliens will qualify for the Earned Income Tax Credit, and if they've been working for three years prior in the US, they'll be eligible for those years too. That's the IRS Commissioner. As Sessions says,
These are not tax “refunds” but direct, free cash payments from the U.S. treasury to low-income illegal immigrants who owe no taxes. It is a dramatic cash transfer from lawful residents to unlawful residents, required by the president's imperial amnesty.
There can be no legal or moral justification for rewarding illegal entrants in this way. Not only is it unfair to strapped taxpayers, but it will encourage countless more to enter the U.S. illegally or to illegally overstay their visas.
Argue what you want about social security, but the second these illegals start paying taxes, they qualify for that federal benefit as well. Same for Medicare. Just like natural born citizens or legal immigrants, it's expected that over their lifetime they'll withdraw more in benefits than they paid into the system. Critique how ass-backward the inventors of these systems designed them, but regardless, that's two more federal benefits.
Look to the legal experts for this one, but no way do promises about excluded benefits to illegals granted legal status hold up in court. Second class citizenship arguments will be litigated and will find their way to the highest court. All the current pretty language and promises will be thrown out.
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
that's well and fine. they should get the tax benefits if they are working.
|
PITTSBURGH (AP) — An appeals court has ruled that the birth control coverage required by federal health care reforms does not violate the rights of several religious groups because they can seek reasonable accommodations.
Two western Pennsylvania Catholic dioceses and a private Christian college had challenged the birth control coverage mandates and won lower-court decisions. However, the U.S. 3rd Circuit Court ruling Wednesday said the reforms place "no substantial burden" on the religious groups and therefore don't violate their First Amendment rights.
All three groups — the college and the Pittsburgh and Erie dioceses — are mulling whether to appeal to the entire 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals or the U.S. Supreme Court.
"Such a ruling should cause deep concern for anyone who cares about any First Amendment rights, especially the right to teach and practice a religious faith," Pittsburgh Bishop David Zubik said in a statement. "This decision says that the church is no longer free to practice what we preach."
At issue is an "accommodation" written into the Affordable Care Act that says religious organizations can opt out of directly providing and paying to cover medical services such groups would consider morally objectionable. In this case, that refers to all contraceptive and abortion services for the Catholic plaintiffs, and contraceptive services like the "week-after" pill and other medical coverage that Geneva College contends violate its anti-abortion teachings. The school in Beaver Falls is affiliated with the Reformed Presbyterian Church.
Justice Department lawyers have argued the accommodation solves the problem because it allows religious groups to opt out of directly providing such coverage. But the plaintiffs contend that merely filing the one-page form, which puts a religious group's objections on record with the government, violates their rights because it still "facilitates" or "triggers" a process that then enables third-party insurers to provide the kind of coverage to which they object.
The appellate opinion written by Judge Marjorie O. Rendell rejects that reasoning.
"Federal law, rather than any involvement by the appellees in filling out or submitting the self-certification form, creates the obligation" for third parties to offer the objected-to coverage, Rendell wrote.
The opinion says the form merely provides a way for the religious groups to avoid being penalized for opting not to directly provide the benefits. But the groups have argued the form does more than that if the third-party providers can't provide the services before the form is filed. That question is expected to be raised in future appeals.
Source
|
On February 19 2015 10:13 Introvert wrote: Huh? Academia has significantly more self-identified liberals than conservatives, though the size of the majority varies from department to department. I think the social sciences are the most lopsided, and that's what is most referred to, it seems. It's hard to identify as an American conservative and an intellectual at the same time. There is nothing idiotic about conservatism, Leo Strauss, Edmund Burke, Hayek, and Schumpeter are all respectable individuals, but the modern American conservatism is so insane, that you got conservatives such as Andrew Sullivan, Francis Fukuyama, and Christopher Buckley giving their support to the Democrats. That is really saying something about our "liberals"
|
On February 19 2015 12:33 Shiragaku wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 10:13 Introvert wrote: Huh? Academia has significantly more self-identified liberals than conservatives, though the size of the majority varies from department to department. I think the social sciences are the most lopsided, and that's what is most referred to, it seems. It's hard to identify as an American conservative and an intellectual at the same time. There is nothing idiotic about conservatism, Leo Strauss, Edmund Burke, Hayek, and Schumpeter are all respectable individuals, but the modern American conservatism is so insane, that you got conservatives such as Andrew Sullivan, Francis Fukuyama, and Christopher Buckley giving their support to the Democrats. That is really saying something about our "liberals" Really America has Liberal and Conservative backwards on most issues. Liberal used to mean libertarian.
|
Liberalism is a very broad ideology with many variants, but what all liberal ideologies have in common is their support for elections, civil rights, freedom of press and religion, and free trade as well as owning private property. To say that there is one definition would be incorrect. The modern Republicans and the TEA Party in particular do not fit any definition of liberalism due to their populism, moral politics, anti-secularism, and corporatism.
|
On February 19 2015 12:36 Millitron wrote:Show nested quote +On February 19 2015 12:33 Shiragaku wrote:On February 19 2015 10:13 Introvert wrote: Huh? Academia has significantly more self-identified liberals than conservatives, though the size of the majority varies from department to department. I think the social sciences are the most lopsided, and that's what is most referred to, it seems. It's hard to identify as an American conservative and an intellectual at the same time. There is nothing idiotic about conservatism, Leo Strauss, Edmund Burke, Hayek, and Schumpeter are all respectable individuals, but the modern American conservatism is so insane, that you got conservatives such as Andrew Sullivan, Francis Fukuyama, and Christopher Buckley giving their support to the Democrats. That is really saying something about our "liberals" Really America has Liberal and Conservative backwards on most issues. Liberal used to mean libertarian.
libertarian used to mean anarchist
|
|
|
|