patrick.net

I bet you buy in to the argument that black voters were disenfranchised because the police were at the voting polls to provide security.
So they were to intimidated to go into vote. Though the obvious question would have been, what were they paranoid of?
But if they weren't there and someone got shot(like happens on a nightly basis in South Florida in that neighborhood) there would have been Hell to pay.

CaptainShuddup says

I bet you buy in to the argument that black voters were disenfranchised because the police were at the voting polls to provide security.

No, but I am somebody that knows that "voter suppression" is a very real republican strategy.

http://videocafe.crooksandliars.com/karoli/shameless-republican-brags-about-voter-id-w

It seems to me that for any self respecting human being, that alone should be enough to say good bye to the extreme right. Besides the democrats are plenty right wing enough. Don't worry.

marcus says

Yes, facts are now political pontification.

You're more than just well on your way.

Rollingstone is was a Rock-N-Roll industry magazine, they haven't had anything constructive to contribute to society in over 20 years.
Other than contributing to my earlier argument, about the adulteration of our preteens, and created a culture of incarcerated teens idolizing those on death row.

Well it was the Liberals that were holding voting cards up to the light trying to dictate what the feeble old senior citizens they bussed to the polls, that should have been at their doctors appointment that day, trying to decipher their intended selection.

In the old days, everyone would have agreed those votes goes into the shit pile.

The Liberal class of 2000 did more to destroy our Democratic process than any Conservative could ever possible do, by protecting the integrity of the voter rolls.

Thanks to that sad display in 2000, disputing election results will now be as frivolous as doing a gratuity shot of Patron at the bar, on a night on the town.

I bet you have a problem with people needing ID to vote?

We've doing that in Florida for as long as I've been Voting. Why is that huge problem now in Texas and Arizona now?

CaptainShuddup says

contributing to my earlier argument, about the adulteration of our preteens,

They followed hip hop, they didn't lead it.

You really think the kids buying hip hop were readers of Rolling Stone ?

Really ?

It might have informed some business moguls about what was going on with hip hop.

Hmmm. So you think the job of a good music magazine should be to try to shape music. Back in 1970 I suppose the typical conservative would have complained that Rolling Stone was paying way too much attention to Hendrix, Cream, and Led Zepplin, and not enough attention to Andy Williams, and Niel Sedaka

Jimi Hendrix crossed the line before he died, and had a few tracks that were banned in the US.

Sheesh marcus...still arguing with CaptainShouldShuddup?

marcus says

You really think the kids buying hip hop were readers of Rolling Stone ?

Yeah when they started calling Bling wearing, Cognac swigging thugs "Rock Stars"

When I'm trying to learn about interesting music, I will often refer to Rolling Stones lists of best albums from the previous year (not always easy to find). Hip hop is on these lists but not over hyped, and quite easy to ignore.

There's always at least a couple or three that are of interest to me.

CaptainShuddup says

marcus says

You really think the kids buying hip hop were readers of Rolling Stone ?

Yeah when they started calling Bling wearing, Cognac swigging thugs "Rock Stars"

Are you for real or just a troll ? It's true, in your case its really hard to tell. You sometimes don't seem as stupid as you insist on portraying yourself.

Again, Rolling Stone follows, they don't lead. They never have had the choice of ignoring what teens are buying and listening to. When they do,
that's when you will know that your fascist fantasy is more true than ever.

Let's just say Marcus I went through the late 90's and early 2000's with a preteen-teen in the family. While I don't believe in censorship, Lou Pearlman's incarceration came about 7 years too late.

And for people to look at PDiddy and Dr. Dre as respectable pioneers, that we're now supposed to buy everything from Laptops to Toothpaste from is a joke.

Parents competing with the garbage these scum bags were producing and marketing to kids "KIDS" not older teens 16-17+. It was adulterating a generation of kids that were ill equipped to deal with that kind of exposure, while the Liberal elite were blaming parents for the kids behavior. You couldn't escape it, the shit was everywhere. There were even K-Tel Kiddie Hop to prime the toddlers. In our day, we got turned on to our older brothers albums after they went to college and we got their room. And we were in our late teens.
We didn't get bombarded by Jimmy Page singing "Squeeze my Lemon" during the cereal commercials of the Bugs Bunny Hour, on Saturday morning.

Am I for real? Yes and I despise the whole damn culture for making me feel like the only one with half a brain in this county that saw where this was all going back then. Was I wrong? No, one of Katherine's pastimes is writing her hommies in prison, or perusing the Mug Shots websites.
It's not just her and her clique, almost the whole damn school from her time there are in dire straights and are not prepared to deal with society. They were tossed in the garbage by a society that felt what Fiddy Cent had to say to 13 year olds were more important than their education and their families right to keep them on the right path.

This was all the while No Child left behind was kicking in, and about the time, if you laid on little finger on your kid or put one hair out of place, you as a parent would find your self in a legal hell of out sourced Child Yankers and anger management, court cases all focusing on you as the parent. While none of these out source Child and Family services could give a rats ass how the Child was faring. There was no boot camp, there was no counseling, there was no tutors, just one ass hole after another showing up at your door, telling you to take your check book out.

Yeah I'm for real, and say "good for them", every time I hear about Censorship in the Asian countries.

Is my anger misguided perhaps, but there should be a lot more pissed off people. Especially a country that is so vocal about the literacy rate and the sad state of our youth in this country. Not everything is Bush's and Fat people's fault.

CaptainShuddup says

They were tossed in the garbage by a society

I hate hip hop too. Never got it, although some of the derivative stuff is interesting (red hot CP, rage against the machine).

Your emotions (and supposed reasoning) sound no different than parents of kids in 1972. Who were growing their hair long, smoking weed and in some cases going on to other drugs. Yes maybe latye teens more than early teens. So ?

Kids always want to be different than their parents. It's the nature of the human ego. It's not our fault that there was no way they would come up with rock that could compare to the 70s. (although early to mid 90s saw a little burst with alternative).

I understand how you feel. But your understanding is all confused with your right wing or redneck bias. But I know, it runs VERY deep. You can't help it any more than your daughter could help all the garbage ideas she was buying in to.

CaptainShuddup says

Is my anger misguided perhaps, but there should be a lot more pissed off people. Especially a country that is so vocal about the literacy rate and the sad state of our youth in this country. Not everything is Bush's and Fat people's fault.

Look, you can't blame dre or snoop for the hip hop values that went mainstream. It's like blaming marilyn manson for columbine. If you want freedom in society, you have to tolerate and accept things that you may strongly disagree with. Ultimately, if the parents have a good relationship with the kid, they can calmly explain their point of view about the values portrayed by aggressive hip hop and if they relate to their kids and are on respectful terms with each other, there's no reason why a kid or teen would have a need to "rebel" and listen to this music as an act of attention seeking.

Gang membership is good preparation for tribal cannibal anarchy.

Didn't humans spend most of the last 100,000 years in "gangs", i.e. tribes? Isn't that why we still think in terms of "us vs. them"?

CaptainShuddup says

CL says

Do you have any, ya know, FACTS to back that up?

Marco Rubio is a Cuban-American Florida Senator that was just elected with about 60% of the Latino vote.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2012/04/12/are-hard-line-cuban-americans-strong-as-ever/old-guard-are-reliable-voters-and-organized

The illegals vote Democrat, but not those with papers. That is why the Left is fighting Florida's right to purge the voters polls of dead and illegal voters so hard.

You're going to use Rubio as proof of your theory, and not as an outlier? He, of CUBAN descent in Florida and a candidate in the outlier 2010 elections?

http://www.pewhispanic.org/2010/11/03/the-latino-vote-in-the-2010-elections/

"Despite these big top-of-the-ticket wins for Republican Hispanic candidates, Democratic candidates won the Latino vote, usually by wide margins. For example, according to the national House exit poll,2 60% of Latino voters supported Democratic candidates in House races while 38% supported Republican candidates.

This majority support for Democratic candidates continues a pattern among Latino voters. In 2006, according to the national exit poll, 69% of Latinos voted for Democratic candidates in their Congressional district races, while 30% supported Republicans. In the 2008 presidential election, Latinos supported Democrat Barack Obama by a margin of more than two-to-one over Republican John McCain—67% versus 31% according to a Pew Hispanic Center analysis of the national exit poll (Lopez, 2008)."

Despite all this noise, Hispanics vote overwhelmingly Democratic in nearly every election.

CL says

Despite all this noise, Hispanics vote overwhelmingly Democratic in nearly every election.

and in reality the return for the votes have been shallow by the Dems Party... The Republicans do actually deliver successful hispanics who stand on their own.

"While support for the Democratic Party among Hispanics has remained strong, some Hispanic leaders have criticized the party for not doing enough to help Hispanic candidates move from city council, legislative and congressional seats to the party's highest elected offices. Former New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson, a candidate in the 2008 U.S. Presidential election, has noted that victories by Hispanic Republican candidates in several key races during the 2010 election cycle, including Marco Rubio in Florida's U.S. Senate race and the elections of Brian Sandoval as Nevada's first Hispanic governor and Susana Martinez as the country's first Latina governor, have posed a significant challenge to the Democratic Party in retaining support among Hispanic and Latino voters. "Democrats have to recruit more Hispanic candidates and they have to start siding with Hispanics on redistricting and other issues," Richardson said, "because many Hispanics perceive the party doesn't care enough about electing more Hispanic officials."

Other Hispanic Democrats, including former DNC vice-chairwoman Linda Chavez-Thompson, have accused the party of taking Hispanic support for granted, and not doing enough to increase turnout among Latinos:
"I think for the longest time [the Democratic Party], including myself, automatically thought that if you were a Latino you voted Democrat," she said. "That’s not true anymore. We need to ramp up our Latino outreach. We can’t sit back and let the Republicans take votes because we don’t have a message for Latino voters." Chavez-Thompson, who ran an unsuccessful campaign for Lieutenant Governor of Texas in 2010, further stated that more money and effort needs to be spent by the Democratic Party and its supporters on targeted messaging, recruitment of Latino candidates, and voter outreach"

The division is over deportation of illegal aliens .. the reality is deporting back non-US citizens of foreign nations shouldnt be an issue. They are called illegal aliens because they entered the US without authorization and are subjects (citizens) of a foreign government. They are not subjects and jurisdiction of the US.

The terms hispanic and/or latino are about as bigoted as they get. Only PC tyrants and unics with no social interaction use those bigoted labels

Put a Spaniard, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Chilean, and a Cuban together and let them know you just how offensive they find it to be confused as one in the same. Its not that they don't get along, however most grew up being proud of their heritage, and lumping them together as if they are all similar because they speak similar variances of "Spanish" is the height of American ignorance

errc says

The terms hispanic and/or latino are about as bigoted as they get. Only PC tyrants and unics with no social interaction use those bigoted labels

Put a Spaniard, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Chilean, and a Cuban together and let them know you just how offensive they find it to be confused as one in the same. Its not that they don't get along, however most grew up being proud of their heritage, and lumping them together as if they are all similar because they speak similar variances of "Spanish" is the height of American ignorance

That doesn't matter for Demographics. Each Demographic may have different reasons for voting for the Democrats, yet they all do (except Cubans, and that is moving towards the Dems).

And, I've spoken to lots of Latinos of various flavors and have never encountered any who were offended by the term. Maybe they should be, or maybe it's a result of our Euro-centric structure, but they take no umbrage at their Euro roots. In fact, most of their societies have favored the folks who have more European ancestry.

thomas.wong1986 says

and in reality the return for the votes have been shallow by the Dems Party..

Even if that were so, it simply indicates that they do not feel welcome in today's racist GOP. They run to the Dems, at least partly due to the demonizing the GOP does to them.

Mexicans and Guatemalans find more in common than they do with a party that favors discrimination based on hue.

Papers, please.

marcus says

Kids always want to be different than their parents. It's the nature of the human ego. It's not our fault that there was no way they would come up with rock that could compare to the 70s. (although early to mid 90s saw a little burst with alternative).

It would be very very very interesting, if there was a Religious Cult or even a Christian zealot overtone in Pop music influencing kids from the age 10 to 16. It would very interesting to see the reverse of your average Liberal on your above sentiment. I would bet, a radio wouldn't be allowed with in 300 yards of a school. What separation of religion and all that. I would bet you wouldn't be allowed to play that music in a public park, or any public building for that matter, let alone at homes of these same people that see no problem with Thugs, Criminals, Pimps, Whores, Drug Addicts, and Murderers being the epitome of a "Small town Boy, done good". Just by talkin' shit.

errc says

unics

Are those similar to unicorns?

CaptainShuddup says

It would be very very very interesting, if there was a Religious Cult or even a Christian zealot overtone in Pop music influencing kids from the age 10 to 16.

The reason that there's no "Religious Cult or even a Christian zealot" music on the radio or in car speakers is because there's no market for it, not because of some secret plot by the "liberals" to prevent this music from being on the air. Your conspiracy theory has been debunked.

Yous guys don't have christian radio?? What kind of sin bin do you heathens reside in?

Its merely light rock where the words are always about love and god and all that nonsense.

"Top 40" in general makes me want to gouge my eyes out with a spork. The crap that passes for 'music' these days, is about as much music as the crap that passes as food, is food.

Did you hear that? It was the chart of evolutionary progress thudding on the ground, weeeeee!!! I'm calling a bottom

errc says

Did you hear that? It was the chart of evolutionary progress thudding on the ground, weeeeee!!!

Don't confuse biological evolution with the "evolution" of music, technology, civilization, etc. Very different things!

The word "evolution" is misused in so many areas simply because it sounds "scientific."

The Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution:

The GE Evolution Series Locomovite:

If a word is used in marketing, it's become a buzzword.

marcus says

...The result is actually leaving kids behind, rather than the other way around.

Look up "teaching to the test" if you want to know more.

Here's an example of the kind of thing you'll find.

Thanks Marcus. I didn't want to quote the whole thing.

Do you think students fall behind because they are not encouraged enough by their parents to learn, do you think the system with very low standards has anything to do with it? A combination of these and other factors?

And if you have time, can you asnwer this question as well. Do you think these tests simply highlight just how far behind the curse students really are?

FortWayne says

Do you think students fall behind because they are not encouraged enough by their parents to learn, do you think the system with very low standards has anything to do with it?

One thing you probably don't understand is this was not nearly all students. In this same school we have graduates going to Harvard, Stanford, MIT, and many other great schools. That is, many of our students do very well. Many students aren't in the class I was talking about. Many students in 9th grade are already taking geometry, algebra 2, or Trigonometry. I always have at least ten 10th graders that are already in my Calculus class (a class that many such as yourself never get to).

About half the students gradaute our school and go on to four year college. Another 47% continue school at a junior college.

In many cases students fall behind for the same reasons they did 20 or 40 years ago. Parent and student expectations are a factor.

Standards are high, but students are allowed to move on to the next grade with relatively low grades (as you know, this is nothing new).

There are no simple answers. It's complex. Psychology plays a role too.

I don't judge students, but the fact is, there are also students who are just slower or of below average intelligence. For these students not trying gives them the belief that they are doing poorly because they choose to (not because they couldn't do much better if they really wanted to). Obviously, they always can do much better if they are willing to try.

Or I think often students have no idea how well they could do if they applied themselves, but bad habits (laziness) can run pretty deep by the time students are in high school. It's scary for them to change their entire approach to life, and bad habits are difficult to change.

I know that the current political enviroment says its all about the schools and the teachers. The truth is public education needs to do better, but we are not worse than we were 30 or 50 years ago. PRobably much better.

You might want to consider one day what the objectives of your propaganda providers is. Could it be lower taxes (they don't want to pay for decent public education)? Their kids aren't going to go to public schools.

They think they can get it for less, by making teaching an even lower income job than it already is. Your evil unions aren't guaranteeing us vast riches. Just a decent working living. But I understand your programming. It's not unlike the problems I see with some students who have too many years of intellectual laziness to change.

marcus says

I don't judge students, but the fact is, there are also students who are just slower or of below average intelligence. For these students not trying gives them the belief that they are doing poorly because they choose to (not because they couldn't do much better if they really wanted to). Obviously, they always can do much better if they are willing to try.

I think this is a really profound point. Convincing someone to work hard in order to excel is one thing, but "If you work very hard you'll be mediocre, but that's better than failing" is much harder. Americans don't really respect hard work as much as they claim to; what they respect is winning. And no matter how you slice it, there are only so many people admitted to top schools, and this same dynamic is to some degree reflected in the rest of society. If you have an economy where virtually all of the wealth and perks go to those at the very top and everyone else is just sharing varying degrees of loserhood, isn't this attitude to be expected?

Just a thought.

Yes the "winner take all" mentality is very strong in America. No one ever accused Americans of being civilized.

Very good point. Thanks for expanding on and adding to what I said. I think what you're saying here is very true, and very well explained.

It doesn't account for the rationale behind every "slacker," but this is definitely going on with a lot of Americans.

It's a crappy job without respect because most people know it's a college major people study if they're not very bright, can't do anything else, don't have any drive or desperately want to re-live their high school days.

rootvg says

It's a crappy job without respect because most people know it's a college major people study if they're not very bright, can't do anything else, don't have any drive or desperately want to re-live their high school days.

My first degree was in business, then much later I got a masters degree in Mathematic (yes, I had to do a lot more undergrad Math first). And I would agree, at least partly with that assessment, or I would have long ago, in the sense that I viewed education majors that way too.

But people who get their bachelors in education are usually going to be elementary school teachers. If they are average in intelligence, and love children, and they prepare well, then as adults they probably are well qualified to teach kids age 7 or 10. The skill set is actually unique.

If they don't have the drive to make it big in the corporate world and would rather have a totally different kind of work, working with and helping young children, I'm not sure, but there might be a certain wisdom in that.

I'm just saying, I felt the same way when I was in college. I just couldn't relate to people who didn't have fantasies of being super rich one day. The idiots !

I like your analysis, but in some parts of the country they turn out SO many of these people not because we need them but because (1) the teacher unions are all powerful, (2) it's a relatively easy degree to get and well understood by the blue collars who predominate in those regions, and (3) it's CHEAP to educate a school teacher when it tends to be expensive to educate the engineers, scientists and other professionals we seem to so badly need.

I graduated in a class of 313 in the mid eighties, and I'll bet one quarter of those kids who were college bound ended up with degrees in Education, primarily Elementary Education. They aren't all slow on the uptake but it's very difficult to have a deep conversation with some of those people. My sister is finishing her Masters in Elementary Ed and when we talk I feel like I'm dragging her along. Her husband is a BSME and MSAE (designs aircraft wings) and it's not that way. My wife has a Masters in Poli Sci and it's not that way. When you talk to those people, they move right along and everything clicks. When you talk to the average Ed major, there's a dead look in their eyes. I've seen it over and over.

I just think a lot of them saw high school as the pinnacle of their lives and want to live it over and over.

rootvg says

I just think a lot of them saw high school as the pinnacle of their lives and want to live it over and over.

When I was in high school, people kept telling me "these are the best years of your life." To which I would reply, "you mean it gets worse?"

CL says

Even if that were so, it simply indicates that they do not feel welcome in today's racist GOP. They run to the Dems, at least partly due to the demonizing the GOP does to them.

Mexicans and Guatemalans find more in common than they do with a party that favors discrimination based on hue.

Papers, please.

LOL! East Bay Radicals have alot to offer the rest of the nation... maybe the rest of California and other states will also adopt all the great things that made Oakland the success story it has become today. Immigrants fleeing persecution will find much confront in east bay Oakland. Heaven forbid any immigrant moves elsewhere to find peace and become productive citizens.. like Santa Clara County...

50 years of wonderful progressive diversity state funded programs have made Oakland the Pearl of the Pacific envy of all... GOOD LUCK !!!

http://www.youtube.com/embed/aPwOTqkZvwM

rootvg says

I just think a lot of them saw high school as the pinnacle of their lives and want to live it over and over.

I think your assessment of education majors is over stated, partly what you perceive as lack of intelligence might be just radically different interests. When I can't relate well to someone, I don't always jump to the conclusion that they're stupid. In your case maybe it's just that they don't like you, or think you're arrogant (no offense). You are pretty right wing. Most teachers are going to be liberal.

Some people don't like arguing even when they see holes in your thinking. Tell me is your sister by any chance a liberal ? Does she by any chance not like to argue with you ?

Most or at least many high school teachers where I'm at did not major in education. Many majored in the subject they teach. I do think it's true that some teachers think of high school as a great time of their life. I didn't become a teacher until I was in my 40s, and wouldn't have thought of it when in my 20s. Adolescence was too much a recent memory. In fact, I sort of view my twenties as a latter stage of adolescence.

In any case, I know what you mean, that it's an unique person that wants to be working back in high school when they are only 5 or 6 years out of high school.

Back to your sister. I've got news for you. She is probably way smarter than you give her credit for. The very fact that you look down on her intelligence tells me a lot.

Speaking of which, I think I used to be sexist in the sense that I sort assumed an edge in certain kinds of intelligence for men, versus women.

Now that I've been teaching for many years, I've reversed my thinking on this (and I teach Mathematics). Now the way I see it is there is no difference in actual aptitude, but women generally do a little better because on average they are more disciplined, have better habits and are less distracted by certain things than men. Some of the very most exceptional Math students I have come across have been girls.

Next time you see your sister get that blank look, ask yourself, did she just stop listening because she thinks I'm an arrogant prick? That would be quite natural if she picks up on your perception of her being less intelligent than you.

thomas.wong1986 says

LOL! East Bay Radicals have alot to offer the rest of the nation...

WTF difference does your assertion make? The point is the problems that the GOP has, that the GOP leaders even recognize that it has.

You are the only one (well, and Captain S) that think the voting patterns don't harm the GOP.

Minorities know the GOP is a den of vipers who trade them as payment to an angry white mob.

We need more money for schools and children - we can't find a way to fund our pensions, and we are not willing to fix pension spiking.