Discussion in 'Politics, Religion & War Issues' started by Guy Fawkes, Jan 6, 2017.
Sen. Ted Kennedy was never charged with murder, let alone convicted.
And what does that prove? Hundreds of racists in the old South were never charged with murdering black victims, let alone convicted. That doesn't mean they weren't guilty of murder; it just proves that we had a very flawed judicial system. When Ted Kennedy drove off a bridge and abandoned Mary Jo Kopechne without even trying to save her, when she probably could have been saved, he murdered another human being. At the time, because the Kennedys were the gods of Massachusetts, law enforcement actually accepted his steaming pile of "dazed & confused" cowplop. The choice to accept that BS doesn't mean that Ted Kennedy wasn't guilty of murder, or at least criminally negligent homicide. It just proves that Massachusetts law enforcement, like all law enforcement, is at times deeply flawed.
The bullshit campaign that every liberal's favorite murderer launched against Jeff Sessions will finally be exposed for the fraud that it is during Sessions' confirmation hearings. I can't wait.
We're going around in circles. And like most of those leaning right, you have selective reading skills. No one is arguing that education is broken, the argument is who is best suited to fix it. De Vos is self serving, and has a dismal record on education.
Yet another effort to divert attention.
Here is a current balanced article on DeVos showing the pitfalls in Michigan and the potential for charter schools as done in New Orleans:
If any new laws passed by Congress follow the New Orleans model, charter schools could greatly improve the inner-city education. We do not know what is coming for sure except we can expect a well needed "shake-up." The current big inner-city school systems have a record of decades of failure that resists any attempt at reform. The New Orleans model got results and improved education; not sure how done properly like in NO, charter schools can be opposed.
You never did comment on the Stanford University study. The positive nationwide results are facts that are hard to argue against. I am afraid it is you who have the selective reading skills.
It's very hard having a conversation with you BJ. You keep going off topic. I briefly glanced at the Stanford piece, but once again I'll repeat myself. No one is arguing against charter schools, I have no doubt that in some parts of the country they are successful, my point is and always has been about Betsy Devos. Period. She has unsuccessfully tried in Michigan for several decades with marginal to failing results, and despite her dismal record, she continued down that path determined to undermine the Department of Education at every turn. She can't even fix her home state. You don't put someone in charge of something that she clearly is incapable of and unwilling to reform. A case in point is Rick 'oops' Perry, who couldn't even remember and wants to dismantle, the very department he is going to be in charge of...Hypocrisy at it's finest.
This attack on Betsy DeVos is just the latest attempt to derail a Trump cabinet nominee. The irony in a Hillary supporter calling someone unqualified is simply stunning. They tried using the same strategy against Mr. Trump himself. That failed and so will this.
There are no modern precedents to the scandalous attempts by Hillary supporters to smear and undermine the President-elect. Two months after his resounding victory and less than two weeks before he takes the Presidential oath of office, the voter-nullification plot is growing more vile.
It began when the Hillary campaign and her donors tried to overturn results in key states, then tried to steal the election outright by intimidating electors of the Electoral College.
When all that failed, the establishment forces that opposed Mr. Trump all along — the Obama White House, members of both parties, the biased, left-wing media, Hollywood elitists, and Big Government activists — switched their goal to thwarting his presidency. One example: They aim to deny confirmation to Ms. Devos and as many as seven other Cabinet picks.
This is not mere politics. It is unprecedented in modern times. This is half the country going rogue in a fit of madness. The attempts by Hillary's non-deplorable supporters to thwart the will of the people and the President-elect will not succeed and will soon be relegated to the dustbin of history.
The Trump train keeps on moving full speed ahead....
America Will Be Great Again
11 days to go
@bigjoey is a deeply caring person. You may remember that he volunteered his time in public schools, so he's coming from a different perspective than many of us. However, I completely understand your frustration. It is totally justified concerning Betsy Devos (and Donald Trump for nominating her).
I am just as frustrated as you, BVB.
I suppose if you can't speak intelligently to DeVos's qualifications you may as well pivot back to the election itself. Trump won; get over it. At a certain point he has to stand on his own qualifications. Though I imagine the most obsessive partisan extremists will be howling "but Hillary" for the next four to eight years any time Trump's actions, qualifications, hypocrisies, capabilities, and conflicts of interest come into question, or those attributes of his extended administration.
I disagree. Many of Trump's cabinet nominees have no prior experience with the work of the departments they will be leading (Carson et al.), or their personal beliefs are at odds with the departments (Perry et al.).
What happens when Trump finally gets to gay marriage and gay rights in general?
I agree with you that in Michigan there are problems with the way charter schools have been administered. In the article you posted, it notes that even with those problems, in Detroit, the charter schools produce better results than the public schools! Hard to call that "failing" or "dismal" for her record.
Now if she can change the Department of Education from being an arm of the teacher unions into an agency being more open to charters AND Congress writes better legislation on charters than Michigan (along the lines of the states with good charters listed by the writer of the article in your post), then we might finally get better education for the children in our inner-city schools.
I think the path to better education lies between Betsy DeVos and what we currently have, I see her as an agent of change. We can not keep losing our young people. This whole debate would not be happening if the teacher unions had accepted reforms rather that fighting even modest proposals.
It is my hope that Betsy DeVos, who clearly cares enough about education to spend millions of dollars of her own money, will bring forth different ideas to be considered to improve education. It is my hope that Congress will completely explore alternatives to our failing schools and write legislation accordingly. It is my hope that teacher unions will no longer be able to block needed reforms. Absolutely hold her feet to the fire and accountable for the results.
Maybe my post wasn't clear. Bozo's response to the DeVos criticism was to pivot and talk about the election, and to suggest that it's hypocritical to criticize DeVos because of Clinton's record. My point is that extremists can't keep ignoring (though they will) Trump's and his nominees' character, history, and qualifications and perpetually deflect the assessment back to Clinton. When someone criticizes Trump or his nominees the laziest trope is to play the "but Hillary" card, or to manufacture a liberal conspiracy, instead of addressing stated facts and prior record for Trump or the nominee in question.
I've made myself clear regarding this administration's position on gay rights. Trump was captured on the record stating that the Court should reverse their decision on gay marriage, then he backpedaled after the election. He endorsed his party's platform, including the FADA. Time will tell whether he supports it, but it's clear that his VP elect and key members of his proposed cabinet will push it forward. The dangerously broad language of the FADA would effectively negate a majority of our marriage rights while sanctioning discrimination against gays, married or otherwise.
While I think that Betsy DeVos has long worked in the education field and understands the issues and is qualified for her nomination, I am puzzled by some other nominees such as Ben Carson. Dr Carson not only has little prior experience but has had little administrative experience in directing a bureaucracy. Dr Carson's confirmation hearings will be interesting to say the least.
I cannot bring myself to "like" the content of the post but I wholehearted agree with Nvr2Thick and thank him for phrasing it in that way.
I'll just leave you with this, since we will not agree on the subject.
"DeVos isn’t an educator, or an education leader. She’s not an expert in pedagogy or curriculum or school governance. In fact, she has no relevant credentials or experience for a job setting standards and guiding dollars for the nation’s public schools.
She is, in essence, a lobbyist — someone who has used her extraordinary wealth to influence the conversation about education reform, and to bend that conversation to her ideological convictions despite the dearth of evidence supporting them."
This deeply dysfunctional educational landscape — where failure is rewarded with opportunities for expansion and "choice" means the opposite for tens of thousands of children — is no accident. It was created by an ideological lobby that has zealously championed free-market education reform for decades, with little regard for the outcome.
And at the center of that lobby is Betsy DeVos, the west Michigan advocate whose family has contributed millions of dollars to the cause of school choice and unregulated charter expansion throughout Michigan.
My guess is that she will make you proud.
Following are excerpts from data I found at http://www.alternet.org/election-20...-charter-school-secrecy-financial-scandal-and ,contributed by freelance writer Kristin Rawls, that breaks down the profit flow from charter school investments to a level closer to my comprehension abilities, and explains possibly why a real estate developer president-elect would like to have such an investor in his cabinet
“As AlterNet has previously reported, two little-understood policies helped pave the way for the kind of charter growth we are seeing today. One, called the New Markets Tax Credit (NMTC), began in 2000 at the end of President Bill Clinton’s administration. According to the Treasury Department, the credit combines:
…the private sector and the federal government—to bring economic and community development to low-income communities. From job creation to increased access to essential educational, health, and retail services, and from the rehabilitation of blighted communities to the development of renewable energy sources, NMTC projects have benefited neighborhoods throughout the country.
And what precisely is the NMTC doing to restore these so-called “blighted communities”? It’s providing hedge fund managers and wealthy real estate investors with opportunities to cash in on the charter school boom. The government frames it as a useful tool that builds communities up, operating on the assumption that charter schools provide some sort of de facto restoration. But as Part I demonstrated, they don’t.
But they do provide wealthy investors with a 39 percent tax credit that more than doubles returns on these investments within just seven years. As Juan Gonzalez reported for Democracy Now!, “this is a tax credit on money that they’re lending, so they’re collecting interest on the loans, as well as getting the 39 percent tax credit.” And that’s not all. As Gonzalez explained, the federal government “piggyback the tax credit on other kinds of federal tax credits, like historic preservation or job creation or Brownfield’s credits. The result is, you can put in $10 million and in seven years double your money.” So, if you put in a couple million dollars, you’ll have double that amount within just seven years.
Real-estate developers have a particularly interesting stake in the business of charter school development. Yes, they receive the standard huge tax breaks. But they can also help charter schools acquire properties in large cities like Philadelphia, Chicago or New York, where prices are high and there isn’t much room for new buildings. In places where acquiring space can involve fierce bidding wars and eminent domain conflicts, well-off real-estate developers profit from charter school growth since they will help new schools get established for a price.
Until recently, most of this money has been filtered through large non-profit organizations like the Gates Foundation, but it can also be done through for-profit companies. In order for donors to be eligible for the tax breaks, they must give to something classified as a Community Development Entity. The federal website explains this can be either a “domestic corporation or partnership.” And it must have “a primary mission of serving LICs [Low Income Communities].”
Kristin Rawls is a freelance writer whose work has also appeared in the Christian Science Monitor, GOOD Magazine, Religion Dispatches, Killing the Buddha, Global Comment and elsewhere online.
Kristin Rawls sources include The New York Times, Miami Herald, and Reuters, among others.
As US Attorney for the District of Alabama, Sessions had used the relatively new Voting Rights Act to prosecute black activists for registering black voters. Not only did that stand the purpose of the VRA - to redress Jim Crow legislation and practices that rolled back the gains of the Civil War amendments and Reconstruction and disenfranchised black Americans - on its head, it was entirely unwarranted, as the defendants' acquittal made clear. Given the outcome, it is hard to imagine any reason for the prosecution other than a bald-faced attempt to intimidate those with the temerity to register black voters in Alabama who might not support the Alabama GOP's policies.
Sessions also regularly called a black lawyer working as an Assistant U.S. Attorney "boy," a means by which black men are reminded of their subordination to white men.
To the best of my knowledge, Sessions has not disavowed any of these past acts, which were the reason he was not confirmed for a District Court opening in 1986.
Thank you for this post.
See what I mean about his tweets. They are a diversion to what is really going on. Sessions is by far the most troubling of all his nominations. Sad day in America.
Interesting article filled with one false statement after another to smear charter schools. For example:
"Studies show that charter schools don't typically outperform public schools."
The Stanford University study says otherwise; the article in bigvalboy's post on Detroit admits charters outperform the traditional
public schools in Detroit. Note, Rawls' statement of fact is unsupported.
New Orleans is listed as a "warning" of what will happen if charter schools succeed. Yet, in the link in my post above, New Orleans charters
are a well recognized success. The writer lists New Orleans like something bad has happened there with no support.
"Charter schools, unlike most traditional public schools, contract with for-profit companies for everything from curriculum development
Hate to tell the writer that traditional schools hire private construction companies to build and repair their buildings. For-profit
publishers do almost all curriculum development; just a look on the spine of school text books tells that story. Total falsehood.
Kristin Rawls has written a piece filled with falsehoods like the above stated as fact. The writer's theory is that supporters of charters are motivated by self-gain but ignores that many charters are run by traditional school districts; in New York City, charters not only occupy some old school buildings but in some case share buildings with traditional schools.
As for the tax credits given for building or remodeling old buildings for charters, the tax codes of cities, states and the federal government are filled with tax credits to motivate people to behave in a certain manner. Rawls complains that the builders of these buildings may get a credit for historic building preservation; that is why our representatives created the credit: to renovate historic buildings. Rawls complains the builders of these buildings may get a "Brownfield" credit; that is why our representatives created the credit: to encourage building in "Brownfields." Rawls complains that the builders of these buildings may get a credit for creating jobs; that is why our representatives created the credit: to create jobs. Rawls big complaint seems to be that WEALTHY INVESTORS are taking advantage of these credits May I suggest to Rawls that all the credits created by our government are taken advantage of by wealthy investors; the poor who pay no taxes do not need tax credits
Does Rawls have a similar hit piece directed against wealthy investors who take tax credits for environmental causes like solar panels, electric cars, wind farms, etc. Or are the only tax credits Rawls finds objectionable ones used to build charter schools?
I respectfully submit that you were taken by the bold title of the Stanford University study.
While there have been some charter school successes, as noted in the study, Rhode Island, District of Columbia and New York City, it has not been across-the-board.
Following are some pertinent notations from within the Stanford University study:
Students from all backgrounds didn’t benefit equally from charter schools, the study found. Black students in poverty achieved above-average learning gains -- equivalent to 36 additional days of learning in math -- as did low-income Hispanic students. White students fared worse overall, while Asians did more poorly only in math.
In the study, 25 percent of charter schools showed significantly stronger learning gains in reading than traditional schools, while 56 percent showed no real difference and 19 percent of charters lagged. In math, 29 percent of charter schools outperformed, while 40 percent were about the same and 31 percent were weaker.
Nevada charters had far worse results than regular schools in reading and math -- equal to 139 fewer days of learning. Pennsylvania charters also underperformed. Steven Canavero, a spokesman for the Nevada Education Department, said the state has already taken steps to address underperforming schools.
Some education researchers criticized the study’s claims. The data from the report show no significant difference between charters and traditional schools, according to Andrew Maul, a researcher at the National Education Policy Center and a professor at the University of Colorado in Boulder.
I'm not personally qualified to analyze the tax credits and real estate manipulations surrounding charter schools, but my point is that the huge donations made to charter schools realize a hefty return on their investments.
Separate names with a comma.