America - The Official Thread

[LeMansAid]

It's a pretty wide gulf, though, between the stupid stuff most of us did in our younger days and deliberately shooting a toddler in the face.

The real point of the article though, isn't juvenile punishment, it's the double standard in this country on racism.

Yeah, I can conceive some leniency for a child or adolescent that is guilty merely by their presence, based on the stupidity of youth argument, but the shooter? I think that maybe at that point they've decided for themselves that they are an adult. That's taking responsibility for another's life, in the most grisly way. The law makes allowances for underdeveloped brains in adults (effectively stretching the "age of innocence"). Equally, I can't see why it shouldn't be stretched in the opposite direction, when a static number doesn't serve proper and reasonable justice.

I agree that there was very much a racism bent to the post. Or could it be that it is actually more about media, and what can be sold as "entertainment"? In turn, would that suggest that white people are being discriminated against, because they are not being afforded the mass outrage that the black community might? Or does it mean that white people are being discriminated for, because they are self-censoring something that might be too distressing for their folk? Or is the censoring a discrimination against white people? We can go round and round in circles, and we'll just get all tied up.

I believe in working towards less sensitivity (not insensitivity), rather than getting caught up in the unending web of over-sensitivity. The southern Europeans have given anglo-Australia some wonderful gifts since migrating from around 1950 onwards. However, I think that their most amazing gift was putting up with and ultimately embracing the derogatory term "***", and the accompanying prejudice and slights. The term has been gradually diffused by the prejudice's victims, and allowed anglo-Australia's often irreverent nature to become useful. I remember hearing an interview with author Thomas Keneally where he quoted a migrant European/Australian. They apparently said something like "You Australians are funny people. I come to Australia and you don't like me so much, you call me *** bastard. Then you you start to like me more, and you call me *** bastard". The negative power had been completely removed.

I hope that drivel makes some sort of sense, but regardless: my point would be that I doubt that there is any future in some kind of racism balancing act.

 

[BobK]

I believe in working towards less sensitivity (not insensitivity), rather than getting caught up in the unending web of over-sensitivity. The southern Europeans have given anglo-Australia some wonderful gifts since migrating from around 1950 onwards. However, I think that their most amazing gift was putting up with and ultimately embracing the derogatory term "***", and the accompanying prejudice and slights. The term has been gradually diffused by the prejudice's victims, and allowed anglo-Australia's often irreverent nature to become useful. I remember hearing an interview with author Thomas Keneally where he quoted a migrant European/Australian. They apparently said something like "You Australians are funny people. I come to Australia and you don't like me so much, you call me *** bastard. Then you you start to like me more, and you call me *** bastard". The negative power had been completely removed.

The same thing has happened to the word "queer".

 

[LeMansAid]

I suppose, by extension, I'm maybe questioning the "hate crime" definition all together. When the crime or wrongdoing is racism itself, call it that. But when the prevailing crime is murder, for example, just call it murder.

 

[FoolKiller]

Well, my daughter is going to private school.

I saw an article about a guy getting arrested speaking out about Common Core school standards being implemented at a public meeting and realized I hadn't been paying enough attention to education standards. I just looked at individual school standings and was glad to see a local public school was one of the best in the state, so we had a backup if private fell through.

So I decided to look at these Common Core standards. Kentucky implemented them in 2011. The standards for completing kindergarten my daughter does now, at 3. Some she's done for a year.

But worse yet are the standards for graduating. Reading and language arts skills are things I did in 5th grade, like reading and comprehending the Preamble to the Constitution. The math requirements are basic algebra and geometry, all which I did in 7th and 8th grades. I did this at a public school in a farming community, where these graduation standards were for kids expected to inherit the family farm or go to an occupational school. They now claim this is the standard for college entry.

This is why we are going to lose any kind of economic or industrial superiority in the world. If we have any left. It doesn't matter how much money you throw at schools if your standards are for idiots.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Well, my daughter is going to private school.

I saw an article about a guy getting arrested speaking out about Common Core school standards being implemented at a public meeting and realized I hadn't been paying enough attention to education standards. I just looked at individual school standings and was glad to see a local public school was one of the best in the state, so we had a backup if private fell through.

So I decided to look at these Common Core standards. Kentucky implemented them in 2011. The standards for completing kindergarten my daughter does now, at 3. Some she's done for a year.

But worse yet are the standards for graduating. Reading and language arts skills are things I did in 5th grade, like reading and comprehending the Preamble to the Constitution. The math requirements are basic algebra and geometry, all which I did in 7th and 8th grades. I did this at a public school in a farming community, where these graduation standards were for kids expected to inherit the family farm or go to an occupational school. They now claim this is the standard for college entry.

This is why we are going to lose any kind of economic or industrial superiority in the world. If we have any left. It doesn't matter how much money you throw at schools if your standards are for idiots.

That is the ultimate long term effect of this kind of policy. When everybody graduates regardless of their level of achievement, graduation then becomes a meaningless achievement in return. No longer can you expect high school graduates to spell and write legibly or be able to do basic math. The "dumbing" down of the school system is going to be a key contributor in our long, slow decline and is also a big part of the continuing cycle of poverty. Hard to get out of the poorhouse, when you can finish highschool with what used to be a grade 8 education.👎👎

 

[Pupik]

And yet, the common core was a massive improvement to the educational standards to many states. Which is kind of disturbing; on the other hand, some of the standards as the kids move up a few years does take them to far higher levels than before. But, its so the rigid standards align themselves exactly to the testing standards. That's not to say that problem-solving and higher-order thinking doesn't come up eventually, but that a lot of subject matter gets left behind.

My daughter is finding the first few weeks of first grade in Alabama (a decently-rated school, no less) a little too easy. Same standards, but they're starting off with pre-school level stuff...good thing mommy's a teacher, and daughter-chan is inquisitive in her quest to be a fractured version of Wikipedia.

Part of me thinks it's a grand plan to make each generation of kids dumber and dumber, but to which I say, they're going to find that competitive nature to get into the best schools, anyhow. Or, have their parents prod them into vicariously-led bragging rights.

 

[Danoff]

I think I said the same thing in the religious thread that I'll say about bad public schools.

Yes, a child can overcome poor education (or religious indoctrination). If your child is intelligent and independent, they can teach themselves everything they need to know. Their motivation can get past even the worst teachers and they will eventually rise to the top.

But... why throw that roadblock in their way? Surely such a motivated child could do more if they weren't hindered by a poor education (or religious indoctrination). It doesn't do any good to waste their time learning material they already mastered (or material that comes from a made-up fairytale). All that does is hold them down.

 

[Joel]

I guess the conspiracy theorist would say that it's because the rich and powerful can afford to send their kids to top notch public( I meant to write private) schools, while keeping the rest of the population stupid keeps them and their family in their elevated position.

 

[Pupik]

There's definitely a big difference between mastering your studies in a safe neighborhood where the biggest distractions are usually "what new toy did my friend get" and "new video game"; whereas in a poor neighborhood, an education isn't highly-prized. Sure, there's a tiny handful which will succeed though hell or high water, but it's a far lesser percentage. And the answer is partially that in many families and communities, an education is not prized nor valued; partially, the live-fast-die-young attitude means a higher dropout percentage: fear of life-and-limb, having to help earn a living, staying healthy/nourished, lack of quiet/reserved study space, and appreciation by others for their studiousness are just a few things. That's also not to say that Wealthy America isn't troubled by things; there's a higher rate of divorce, for example. Or the uber-wealthy sometimes forget their child shouldn't be on a 90-day vacation from school. But these difficulties happen to a far lesser extent.

While schools don't exactly need a complete slashing of budgets, throwing money at the process isn't a guaranteed result; the communities have to value the education in the first place, and sustain a tacit respect for it...which might take twenty years. No adjustment to educational standards are going to improve those things, unless they're dragged down to a level that would typically be reserved for Sesame Street. In that case, it's a case of Everyone's A Winner, which muddies things for the folks who want to improve their lot, but the higher educational establishments have no idea how to prize one potential student over another.

Nerp, kind of off-topic.

 

[Danoff]

I guess the conspiracy theorist would say that it's because the rich and powerful can afford to send their kids to top notch public schools, while keeping the rest of the population stupid keeps them and their family in their elevated position.

"Afford" to send their kids to a top notch "public" school....

Something seems wrong with that sentence. I'm not saying it's incorrect, but think about the implications. Public schools fund themselves through property taxes. They collect more in neighborhoods that have high property value - which means neighborhoods with high priced houses get better education from their "public" school.

Of course that system is even worse than the private school aristocracy that so many seem to be concerned about. Think it's tough to afford private school tuition? How about affording a HOUSE the value of which has to be many many times that tuition.

The public school system is many times more exclusive and harmful to the poor than private school ever would be.

the communities have to value the education in the first place, and sustain a tacit respect for it

Nothing like "free" to make people disrespect something's value.

 

[FoolKiller]

But... why throw that roadblock in their way? Surely such a motivated child could do more if they weren't hindered by a poor education (or religious indoctrination). It doesn't do any good to waste their time learning material they already mastered (or material that comes from a made-up fairytale). All that does is hold them down.

Apparently, because it makes you a bad person to want the best for your child.

http://www.slate.com/articles/doubl...ly_bad_people_send_their_kids_to_private.html

You are a bad person if you send your children to private school. Not bad like murderer bad—but bad like ruining-one-of-our-nation’s-most-essential-institutions-in-order-to-get-what’s-best-for-your-kid bad. So, pretty bad.

I am not an education policy wonk: I’m just judgmental. But it seems to me that if every single parent sent every single child to public school, public schools would improve. This would not happen immediately. It could take generations. Your children and grandchildren might get mediocre educations in the meantime, but it will be worth it, for the eventual common good. (Yes, rich people might cluster. But rich people will always find a way to game the system: That shouldn’t be an argument against an all-in approach to public education any more than it is a case against single-payer health care.)

It's this insane babble that leads to these policies. Sacrifice your child's education so that everyone can be better generations from now.

One problem with her argument: She claims they if parents who were concerned were more involved in public schools they would fight to improve the schools and hold them accountable.

This is what happens when parents fight to improve schools.


Oh yeah, you can definitely bring about change as you get forced out the door.

Side note: The man was arrested and charged with assaulting the police officer. Huh? The DA dropped the charges. But the second charge the man faced was: disrupting a school function. It was a public meeting to address questions about common core standards. How was demanding an answer disrupting a meeting to answer questions?

Danoff, I know you are not approving of religion, but around here the best private schools (some places, the only private schools) are Catholic schools. People in an advance track can graduate with enough college credit to start college as a Sophmore. It sounds counterintuitive that with a daily distraction of religion that can happen, but the quality of the education is good enough to teach more in less time and the parents who put forth the notion of wanting "a good religious education" and pay for it are likely to be involved in their child's overall education.

 

[Joel]

"Afford" to send their kids to a top notch "public" school....

Something seems wrong with that sentence. I'm not saying it's incorrect, but think about the implications. Public schools fund themselves through property taxes. They collect more in neighborhoods that have high property value - which means neighborhoods with high priced houses get better education from their "public" school.

I did mean to write private, but it seems the typo spurred on a good point regardless 👍

 

[Badasp5.0]

Danoff, I know you are not approving of religion, but around here the best private schools (some places, the only private schools) are Catholic schools. People in an advance track can graduate with enough college credit to start college as a Sophmore. It sounds counterintuitive that with a daily distraction of religion that can happen, but the quality of the education is good enough to teach more in less time and the parents who put forth the notion of wanting "a good religious education" and pay for it are likely to be involved in their child's overall education.

Same here. I am seriously thinking of sending my 7yo daughter to private Catholic school once my families fiances clear up.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I wonder, does an off duty police officer have the right to forcibly remove someone from a public meeting for breaking no laws?

 

[Omnis]

I wonder, does an off duty police officer have the right to forcibly remove someone from a public meeting for breaking no laws?

He's not off-duty, he's plainclothes.

Looks like the officer assaulted that guy. Not sure if you can manhandle someone like that without placing them under arrest.

 

[FoolKiller]

I wonder, does an off duty police officer have the right to forcibly remove someone from a public meeting for breaking no laws?

When he is moonlighting as security, yes. And if necessary, identifying themselves as a police officer is allowed, same as an off-duty officer stopping a robbery.

It makes me wonder though about how public reaction to the school policies have been if they expected a need for police. We never had police at my school board or PTA meetings.

 

[Nicksfix]

My daughter is finding the first few weeks of first grade in Alabama (a decently-rated school, no less) a little too easy. Same standards, but they're starting off with pre-school level stuff...good thing mommy's a teacher, and daughter-chan is inquisitive in her quest to be a fractured version of Wikipedia.

Is moving your daughter up a grade an option down there ?

Around here, it has happened. If a child displays more smarts than their current grade level, the teacher / staff will contact the parents and recommend that the child be moved up a notch.

 

[FoolKiller]

Is moving your daughter up a grade an option down there ?

Around here, it has happened. If a child displays more smarts than their current grade level, the teacher / staff will contact the parents and recommend that the child be moved up a notch.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was no longer allowed because it might make the other kids feel bad.

Doogie Howser, bully.

 

[Nicksfix]

I wouldn't be surprised if it was no longer allowed because it might make the other kids feel bad.

True, good point.
However, what has more importance here, the feelings of kids who are not as gifted as yours or keeping your kid from being bored in school by keeping them at a level in which they are above ?

That's why I posed the question. It has happened around here, the child was bored with the lesser teachings and subsequently started not paying attention in the classroom due to the boredomness (word ? ). The child got bumped up, became more attentive and was just fine after doing so.

 

[Johnnypenso]

When he is moonlighting as security, yes. And if necessary, identifying themselves as a police officer is allowed, same as an off-duty officer stopping a robbery.

It makes me wonder though about how public reaction to the school policies have been if they expected a need for police. We never had police at my school board or PTA meetings.

So if you're a cop, you can physically assault someone in a public meeting where no crime is committed? That's legal?

 

[Danoff]

Danoff, I know you are not approving of religion, but around here the best private schools (some places, the only private schools) are Catholic schools. People in an advance track can graduate with enough college credit to start college as a Sophmore. It sounds counterintuitive that with a daily distraction of religion that can happen, but the quality of the education is good enough to teach more in less time and the parents who put forth the notion of wanting "a good religious education" and pay for it are likely to be involved in their child's overall education.

Well my original statement about holding children back with religion was about successfully indoctrinating them with your religion. So you convince them that God is real and make them learn scripture and then they have to work that much harder as adults to understand the real world. It wasn't aimed at putting an atheist child in a religious school and asking them to hold their nose.

I went to Catholic school as a child, and despite the loss of a classroom period to reading fairytales, and the occasional lost recess to mass service, I felt that the education there was significantly better. When I attended public school afterward I spent somewhere between half a year and a year repeating material that I had already learned in Catholic school. On the balance Catholic school was better.

That being said, theology wasn't aggressively tested - so I didn't waste time studying for it at home. Also my parents didn't support it, or force me to learn it, so the damage was really limited to that one classroom session per day. Public school wasted far far more of my time than one classroom session. I had 3 or 4 periods per day where I did things like play chess in class or doodle.

 

[Pupik]

Nothing like "free" to make people disrespect something's value.

Something my father told me years ago always seems to ring true: "Everyone knows the cost of things, but few understand the value of those same things."

 

[FoolKiller]

So if you're a cop, you can physically assault someone in a public meeting where no crime is committed? That's legal?

No more than if he is on duty. Like I said, if necessary. Had this man been a threat it would be 100% justified. In this case, I only believe he identified himself as police to scare and prevent the man from resisting.

 

[Sanji Himura]

FK, was the man resisting at all? All he was doing was getting a simple question answered, and when the school board refused to answer the question, THEY demanded him removed for not following procedure.

That was the problem with the situation. The school board had participants write their questions down on a piece of scrap paper for them to read. Do you know what that leads to? It will give the School board the power to pick and choose which questions were "asked" and which were going to be ignored, and that man wasn't going to take that.

 

[FoolKiller]

FK, was the man resisting at all? All he was doing was getting a simple question answered, and when the school board refused to answer the question, THEY demanded him removed for not following procedure.

No, the man wasn't resisting. Nothing about the way that meeting was handled should have happened.

 

[Johnnypenso]

No more than if he is on duty. Like I said, if necessary. Had this man been a threat it would be 100% justified. In this case, I only believe he identified himself as police to scare and prevent the man from resisting.

Had he been a threat I wouldn't have posted the question. The guy wanted to ask a question and as far as I'm concerned, he was assaulted and forced to leave the room. I suspect a lawsuit may follow or he may bring charges...I hope so.

 

[Omnis]

So Obama called Iran. Thank goodness.

 

[Crash]

I was surprised by how quickly politics on Iran turned. It went from "We're going to bomb you back to the Stone Age any moment now" to "Let's be friends!" in a matter of few days.

 

[BobK]

So Obama called Iran. Thank goodness.

What did he call them?

 

[DK]

I wouldn't be so hopeful - the final say on Iran's foreign policy lies with the biggest hardliner of them all, Ayatollah Khamenei.