A giddy-smile dancing cokehead loser

Author: 949havoc

Posts

Total: 24
Topic's author
#1
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
A week following the election last Tuesday, I’ve reflected on the surprising results, particularly in VA, where McAuliffe snatched defeat from the jaws of victory by being, frankly, stupid. Several statements led him down the road to defeat, but one stands proud as a woke nutjob: That parents should not have a say in their children’s education. Many people believe this. Apparently, not enough to win in a statewide election in a blue state. Not yet. The trend is definitely turning sour against parents because such a statement, even four years ago, would have been laughed off a campaign stage.
 
I am not going to claim that the Covid pandemic was a conspiracy because, frankly, it doesn’t matter. Trying to take advantage of the issue by Democrats, however, was laughable in the extreme. Can’t really blame Democrats for the general shutdown last summer, and maybe a brief closure did help control the spread of the disease, but I heard few complaints from Democrats. It worked to their favor, or so they thought, because the shutdown was not just business; it was education, too. And because schools shutdown, at least one parent needed to stay home even if their particular work situation continued to remain open, just to be with their kids. I’ve known for a long time that school boards across the country were not chomping at the bit to maintain an open communication with parents once a more radical curriculum took hold, but with a parent home to witness what was being taught first hand, the inevitable occurred: Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers.
 
Democrats shot themselves in the head on this one. With Double-down McAuliffe speaking his empty-headed mind, what semblance of a victory he had flew up his nose. Well, the last week of his campaign, he was dancing around on stage like a giddy-smile cokehead. It was hilarious, and revealing. 
Democrats may want to re-think their education strategy because this one educated too much. Good thing. The last thing we need is a bunch of little Communists at our dinner tables.
#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,062
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@949havoc
Better a bunch of "little communists", than a bunch of little zealots.

Well, in my opinion.


So as predicted,  height and nose ruled the day in the end.

Such is the fickle nature of U.S. politics.

Us rather than them, as dictated by the floating minority. 

2%, That's a heck of a mandate.



Topic's author
#3
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@zedvictor4
I never said that Youngkin has a mandate; it's clear that VA is divided. It's purple, not red.
#4
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@949havoc
Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers.
Can you please explain exactly what it was about the curriculum that was so radical it propelled Youngkin to the governorship?
Topic's author
#5
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Double_R
I repeat my #1:

Several statements led him [McAuliffe] down the road to defeat, but one stands proud as a woke nutjob: That parents should not have a say in their children’s education. 

#6
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@949havoc
Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers.
Can you please explain exactly what it was about the curriculum that was so radical it propelled Youngkin to the governorship?

Topic's author
#7
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Double_R
For the third time,

That parents should not have a say in their children’s education. 

#8
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@949havoc
You do realize a public statement by an official is not “the curriculum” right?
#9
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@949havoc
The political argument about CRT being made by republicans is about education about as much as the political arguments about welfare queens was about welfare.
Topic's author
#10
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Double_R
The issue, my friend, is that McAuliffe refused to recognize that parents have a say in school curriculum. It's called "PTA" because parents are part and parcel of the. organization, yeah? What does the pTA exist to do?  https://www.pta.org/home/About-National-Parent-Teacher-Association/Mission-Values

You do realize that, yeah? Perhaps not, you've missed the point on four occasions.
Topic's author
#11
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Ramshutu
Where in this thread have I even mentioned CRT? Let's review....
Nope, but you did. My thrust was the senseless longterm shutdown of schools allowing parents to witness what their children are being taught [non-specific, until you brought it up]. But, go ahead, tell me what I'm thinking. You usually do. Funny thing. Your universe compelling thought and action is working overtime, but not working well on my behalf. Seems I still have a mind to think for myself.
#12
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@949havoc
“the inevitable occurred: Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers.”
Oh, so you weren’t referring to CRT here? It was a pretty reasonable assumption given this is the only thing t he right has been talking about with respect to Virginia eduction.

What were you referring to then?
#13
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@949havoc
The issue, my friend, is that McAuliffe refused to recognize that parents have a say in school curriculum…

You do realize that, yeah? Perhaps not, you've missed the point on four occasions.
It doesn’t take 3 paragraphs to make that point. You said a lot of things, then when I point one out to you you want to pretend it doesn't matter. But we both know what’s happening here, you can’t back up your statement so instead of just admitting that you want to turn the table on me as if I can’t read or comprehend. Except that I can. We all can.

Of course parents “have a say” in the curriculum. Do you really think Youngkin became governor because parents didn’t have a say? Of course not, that’s stupid. No one cares whether they had a say when they agree with the outcome.

They came out and voted because they didn’t like what was in the curriculum. Except that as you are demonstrating here, what they were actually up in arms over is complete and total nonsense. And when people try to argue a nonsense position the only way they can sound halfway intelligent is to make it a principal issue, just like when people say they’re not anti Covid vaxx, they’re pro freedom! No, they're just trying to own the libs.
Topic's author
#14
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Ramshutu
No reference. I said it all. McAuliffe said parents have no business in oversight of school curricula. Obviously sufficient voters disagreed to hand him a loss. Sometimes, what is said is all that is said. If you want to read more into it from my perspective, you must provide the read. You did. And you're wrong.
#15
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@949havoc
You said:

the inevitable occurred: Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers
how do you mean? In what way? What about the curriculum do you think is radical - I would be happy to talk about that. You are talking about the rebellion of parents against the curriculum in a the was talking about an election:

What else could you be possibly be referring to?

Because while you said:

I said it all
You actually made no mention at all of what was in the curriculum that you felt made all these parents rebel.


Topic's author
#16
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Double_R
just like when people say they’re not anti Covid vaxx, they’re pro freedom! No, they're just trying to own the libs.
Sounds like the identical argument for pro-choice of abortion. Funny, a lot of people were offended by that comment I made in another thread. Can't have it both ways, my friend.
Topic's author
#17
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Ramshutu
I don't live in VA. I don't know what about the curriculum they opposed. I can guess, but that's all you're doing. So, have at it. I don't have the time.
#18
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@949havoc
I don't live in VA. I don't know what about the curriculum they opposed. I can guess, but that's all you're doing. So, have at it. I don't have the time.
So if you don’t know what the curriculum is, in what basis can you state:

Parents learned just how radical the curriculum was, and they have obviously rebelled in large numbers
Are you not sure whether the curriculum is radical?

Topic's author
#19
949havoc
949havoc's avatar
Debates: 7
Posts: 816
3
2
8
949havoc's avatar
949havoc
3
2
8
-->
@Ramshutu
Are you not sure whether the curriculum is radical?
Let's go back to what I said:

 I’ve known for a long time that school boards across the country were not chomping at the bit to maintain an open communication with parents once a more radical curriculum took hold
I'm comparing my own experience, actually from the time I was in school as to what I consider radical.

1. In a high school as a senior, [I was the senior class president], my history teacher, who always acted a little weird [and he kept a fifth of bourbon in his classroom desk drawer] told me to take all the male students [back then, we knew who we were], and leave the classroom to find the tiger roaming the hallways; he would stay behind to protect the females. To me, that's radical [+ crazy].

2. In the same year, in a physiology class, the teacher announced that human DNA did not contribute to behavioral personality traits, but that these differences in us were directed by the universe. Sound familiar? We didn't actually know, then, which I argued, but we have since learned that up to 50% of our personality and behavior is genetically inherited from parents. However, we also know that such chemistry can be altered, mutated,  by our dietary choices. Thus choices, free will, if you will, does counter-intuit personality and behavior. Coincidentally,  earlier that year, I attended a UCLA symposium featuring Dr. James Watson of DNA discovery fame, who revealed his own research that contradicted the teacher's opinion. To me, the teacher's position was radical.

3. The same history teacher in #1, covering Civil War history, taught that slavery in America was unique to black slaves [the teacher was an African immigrant], and, looking back, would have embraced BLM, CRT, and probably LGBTQ, but he was probably dead before the turn of the century. To me, the teacher's position was radical. One of the girls in my class mentioned to me once that she thought he had made a pass at her. I advised her to consult with the Girl's VP. To me, the teacher's position was radical.

4. In an undergraduate philosophy course, the professor, discovering I was religious, declared a personal challenge to me, in class, in front of other students, that by the end of the course, I would be an atheist like him. To me, the professor's position was radical.

5. In a late undergrad French course, the prof. addressed the student riots in Paris in 1968, declaring them justified as a protest against capitalism, among other charges. These students were largely motivated by a coalition of communists and socialists in French government and academics attempting to overthrow De Gaulle. My prof applauded the effort, and was disappointed that protests in the US were not so inspired socially as politically against the Viet Nam war. Problem was, my prof had never been to France. I'd already spent three years there, interrupting my undergrad studies. To me, the professor's position was radical.

That's what I mean by radical curricula.
#20
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@949havoc
4. In an undergraduate philosophy course, the professor, discovering I was religious, declared a personal challenge to me, in class, in front of other students, that by the end of the course, I would be an atheist like him. To me, the professor's position was radical.
This is a very toxic thing to do. Everything else you mentioned is somewhat understandable craziness (I am not sure exactly what the tiger scenario was) but this is just direct toxicity. Even if that teacher believed it, this is the type of thing to say in private to you if you're a student he feels he can be candid and/or have a bit of banter with. To directly do this to you is disrespectful on many levels because it implies that every other Theist in the room was more respected in their faith than you.
#21
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 574
Posts: 19,931
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Double_R
just like when people say they’re not anti Covid vaxx, they’re pro freedom! 
This actually is a genuine stance to take and furthermore there's currently four vaccinations being used (actually I think a fifth one is out and about) within the US. I am perplexed at why people think it's okay to blackmail people to be guinea pigs to a vaccine that already more than enough humans have taken for the human-trial phase of the vaccine to complete (which it never did, due to time constraints). We need to see if it in any way harms people and if it harms offspring that were conceived post-vaccine as these are actually specifically where those that have concerns are saying the harms are plausibly at.

You can pretend and twist anything but it is 100% pro-freedom to oppose blackmailed vaccination when the vaccines are still in their preliminary stages.
#22
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@949havoc
Sounds like the identical argument for pro-choice of abortion. Funny, a lot of people were offended by that comment I made in another thread. Can't have it both ways, my friend.
I should have known when throwing in that last line that you would use it to wiggle out of the conversation. But whatever, clearly you have no idea what you’re talking about with regards to the “radical curriculum” you speak of. Reality be dammed.

We’ve been through the whole abortion debate. Principals are valid justifications when they’re sincere. Almost none of the people claiming pro freedom from vaccines had any problem over the past few decades with all of the other vaccines we all had to get before going to school, it’s only now that it’s being politicized that people care. It’s nonsense, that’s the point.
#23
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,260
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@RationalMadman
I am perplexed at why people think it's okay to blackmail people to be guinea pigs to a vaccine that already more than enough humans have taken for the human-trial phase of the vaccine to complete (which it never did, due to time constraints)
The trial phase is where we test the efficacy and safety of the vaccines, the people who take the vaccine afterwards are literally the opposite of a guinea pig. Your statement makes no sense, you can then guinea pigs yet acknowledge “more than enough” humans to the vaccine, so which is it?

We need to see if it in any way harms people and if it harms offspring that were conceived post-vaccine as these are actually specifically where those that have concerns are saying the harms are plausibly at.
There is no evidence it does nor any legitimate reason to even suspect it would. This is a made up concern by anti vaxx conspiracy theorists looking for anything to scare people out of taking it. 

You can pretend and twist anything but it is 100% pro-freedom to oppose blackmailed vaccination when the vaccines are still in their preliminary stages
Over 7 billion people have been vaccinated, we’re way past the preliminary stages. And the blackmailing argument is just not serious. We just went through a pandemic that’s killed millions worldwide and almost 800k in the US. If you don’t want to get vaccinated that’s your right, but the rest of society has every legitimate right to take the appropriate measures to keep the virus from spreading.

#24
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@949havoc
 I’ve known for a long time that school boards across the country were not chomping at the bit to maintain an open communication with parents once a more radical curriculum took hold

I'm comparing my own experience, actually from the time I was in school as to what I consider radical.
You’re talking about schools, and school curriculum - this is, you know, the approved lessons, material, etc, the themes of what is taught - broadly, the things the school board directs teachers to teach.

1. In a high school as a senior, [I was the senior class president], my history teacher, who always acted a little weird [and he kept a fifth of bourbon in his classroom desk drawer] told me to take all the male students [back then, we knew who we were], and leave the classroom to find the tiger roaming the hallways; he would stay behind to protect the females. To me, that's radical [+ crazy].
This is an Anecdote. It’s kinda weird - but not curriculum.

2. In the same year, in a physiology class, the teacher announced that human DNA did not contribute to behavioral personality traits, but that these differences in us were directed by the universe. Sound familiar? We didn't actually know, then, which I argued, but we have since learned that up to 50% of our personality and behavior is genetically inherited from parents. However, we also know that such chemistry can be altered, mutated,  by our dietary choices. Thus choices, free will, if you will, does counter-intuit personality and behavior. Coincidentally,  earlier that year, I attended a UCLA symposium featuring Dr. James Watson of DNA discovery fame, who revealed his own research that contradicted the teacher's opinion. To me, the teacher's position was radical.
Weird anecdote again. But a teachers opinion is not curriculum.

3. The same history teacher in #1, covering Civil War history, taught that slavery in America was unique to black slaves [the teacher was an African immigrant], and, looking back, would have embraced BLM, CRT, and probably LGBTQ, but he was probably dead before the turn of the century. To me, the teacher's position was radical. One of the girls in my class mentioned to me once that she thought he had made a pass at her. I advised her to consult with the Girl's VP. To me, the teacher's position was radical.
Again, kinda weird: not entirely clear what the issue is. Doesn’t seem to be curriculum.

4. In an undergraduate philosophy course, the professor, discovering I was religious, declared a personal challenge to me, in class, in front of other students, that by the end of the course, I would be an atheist like him. To me, the professor's position was radical.
Again: anecdote and not school: and a challenge from a professor is not curriculum.

5. In a late undergrad French course, the prof. addressed the student riots in Paris in 1968, declaring them justified as a protest against capitalism, among other charges. These students were largely motivated by a coalition of communists and socialists in French government and academics attempting to overthrow De Gaulle. My prof applauded the effort, and was disappointed that protests in the US were not so inspired socially as politically against the Viet Nam war. Problem was, my prof had never been to France. I'd already spent three years there, interrupting my undergrad studies. To me, the professor's position was radical.
Again, college. A professors opinion is not curriculum.