Prestor Jon wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Leaving the SJW stuff aside, the media is much more about following along with a given narrative then it is about researching actual truths and reporting accurate stories.

Spoiler:

"Oh no, they used the word Chaos a lot! It must mean that they aren't reporting accurately!"

Repeating a story is not the same as verifying a story. Do you want "news" agencies to just play a game of follow the leader and regurgitate whatever story is given to them or do you want them to try to find out what is actually going on?

Prestor Jon wrote:
Repeating a story is not the same as verifying a story. Do you want "news" agencies to just play a game of follow the leader and regurgitate whatever story is given to them or do you want them to try to find out what is actually going on?

Repeating a story is not the same as verifying a story

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Devos appointment is quite brilliant actually. The R's love an uneducated voter and when Devos is done their all but garaunteed a bumper crop.

Seems the Dept of Education has been under D control for a while, as are the public worker unions (to include teacher unions), and our students-to-be-voters are not doing all that well anyway.

Exactly. Look at the cluster that was Common Core. Great idea that could have been done on the back of napkin turned into a bureaucratic political nightmare.

Hrm, lets also be fair here, that was an ostensibly non-partisan thing that got taken by some elements on the right to some...very strange places, with more than a wee bit of misrepresentation on many counts, that in many ways was never a fair shake. I have no idea if it would have been better than what we had going before or worse, I'm not an educator, but the loony-bin stuff and outright complete fabrications and misrepresentations around Common Core was...well, would have been amusing had such things not been so forcefully believed by some.

EDIT: also, yeah, lets not bring Scott Adams into this as proof of anything, the guy's turned into something of a nutjob after he got caught out forum trolling in his own defense under assumed aliases, and stated he believed not endorsing Hillary would be an actual safety issue for him.

 Easy E wrote:
So, does anyone have any actual data about how we are getting worse education results? All I am seeing is people's feelings.

Last I had heard, our High School grad rates were up to 83%, the highest ever. So that means a lot more students are taking ACT/SAT testing than ever before, and the scores are relatively flat despite the increasing number of students taking the tests.


Grad rate:
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/10/17/498246451/the-high-school-graduation-reaches-a-record-high-again

Scores:
http://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-score-for-2015-2014-2013-and-earlier-years

None of this means that their are no problems, as their is still an achievement gap based on ethnicity/socio-econimic factors.

Overall, things have not been bad in the Education field at all. People only "Feel" like things are bad. I wonder why?

 Frazzled wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

 CptJake wrote:

lonestarr777 wrote:
Devos appointment is quite brilliant actually. The R's love an uneducated voter and when Devos is done their all but garaunteed a bumper crop.

Seems the Dept of Education has been under D control for a while, as are the public worker unions (to include teacher unions), and our students-to-be-voters are not doing all that well anyway.

Exactly. Look at the cluster that was Common Core. Great idea that could have been done on the back of napkin turned into a bureaucratic political nightmare.

Hrm, lets also be fair here, that was an ostensibly non-partisan thing that got taken by some elements on the right to some...very strange places, with more than a wee bit of misrepresentation on many counts, that in many ways was never a fair shake. I have no idea if it would have been better than what we had going before or worse, I'm not an educator, but the loony-bin stuff and outright complete fabrications and misrepresentations around Common Core was...well, would have been amusing had such things not been so forcefully believed by some.

EDIT: also, yeah, lets not bring Scott Adams into this as proof of anything, the guy's turned into something of a nutjob after he got caught out forum trolling in his own defense under assumed aliases, and stated he believed not endorsing Hillary would be an actual safety issue for him.

Scott Adams? Que?

To Common Core, my point(don't get me started on the math portion thats a literal WTF????) was it turned into a massive bureaucratic project. It would have been easy to take a day, look at the curriculums at the best school districts or states, and just scratch out the name and insert "we recommend this."

d-usa wrote:
Didn't the States develop common core?

Easy E wrote:
Overall, things have not been bad in the Education field at all. People only "Feel" like things are bad. I wonder why?

 Frazzled wrote:
Studies comparing US kids internationally, its almost justa joke at this point.

 Frazzled wrote:
I'm going to have to disagree. if you want to recommend federal level recommendations, they should be simple, not that hot mess of a nightmare.

Within hours of being shut down on the Senate floor, Ms. Warren read the letter from Mrs. King on Facebook, attracting more than two million views — an audience she would have been unlikely to match on C-Span, if she had been permitted to continue speaking in the chamber.

 sebster wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
That's different from a quid pro quo arrangement.

feth me I just burst out laughing, almost woke the baby.

We just went through a whole fething year of the right wing saying any money in to the Clinton Foundation was proof of something or other, and the left talking about how what you needed was an actual quid pro quo, otherwise you ain't got gak. Now there's a Republican in charge and oh my god holy gak will you look at that the right has adopted a very narrow definition of acceptable favours for cash. Who could have seen that coming?

Anyhow, moving past the Clinton Foundation conspiracy nonsense, and to Obama's actual appointments, Obama did reward significant contributors to his campaign with political appointments. I don't know if he appointed anyone who directly paid in big money, but there was more than a few who ran large donation lobbying efforts who were given diplomatic posts. That was gak, to put it bluntly. It is not good enough whenever someone closely connected to the money trough is moved in to a government position, it is far too open to corruption.

Trump has gone well past Obama's appointments. He is appointing someone that didn't just lobby for him, but directly paid in, and not to some backwater diplomatic posting, he's giving them a cabinet position.

And all the people who cheered him on for saying he'll drain the swamp seem rather okay with this.

HOUSTON — It’s looking as if 2017 could become the year when the anti-vaccination movement gains ascendancy in the United States and we begin to see a reversal of several decades in steady public health gains. The first blow will be measles outbreaks in America.

Measles is one of the most contagious and most lethal of all human diseases. A single person infected with the virus can infect more than a dozen unvaccinated people, typically infants too young to have received their first measles shot. Such high levels of transmissibility mean that when the percentage of children in a community who have received the measles vaccine falls below 90 percent to 95 percent, we can start to see major outbreaks, as in the 1950s when four million Americans a year were infected and 450 died. Worldwide, measles still kills around 100,000 children each year.

The myth that vaccines like the one that prevents measles are connected to autism has persisted despite rock-solid proof to the contrary. Donald Trump has given credence to such views in tweets and during a Republican debate, but as president he has said nothing to support vaccination opponents, so there is reason to hope that his views are changing.

However, a leading proponent of the link between vaccines and autism said he recently met with the president to discuss the creation of a presidential commission to investigate vaccine safety. Such a commission would be a throwback to the 2000s, when Representative Dan Burton of Indiana held fruitless hearings and conducted investigations on this topic. And a documentary alleging a conspiracy at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” has recently been shown around the country.

As a scientist leading global efforts to develop vaccines for neglected poverty-related diseases like schistosomiasis and Chagas’ disease, and as the dad of an adult daughter with autism and other disabilities, I’m worried that our nation’s health will soon be threatened because we have not stood up to the pseudoscience and fake conspiracy claims of this movement.

Texas, where I live and work, may be the first state to once again experience serious measles outbreaks. As of last fall, more than 45,000 children here had received nonmedical exemptions for their school vaccinations. A political action committee is raising money to protect this “conscientious exemption” loophole and to instruct parents on how to file for it. As a result, some public school systems in the state are coming dangerously close to the threshold when measles outbreaks can be expected, and a third of students at some private schools are unvaccinated.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has produced a 21-page document listing all of the studies clearly showing there is no link between vaccines and autism, in addition to more recent epidemiological studies involving hundreds of thousands of children or pregnant women that also refute any association. A study of infant rhesus monkeys also shows that vaccination does not produce neurobiological changes in the brain.

Vaccines are clearly not the reason children develop autism. So what is? There is strong evidence that genetics play a role, and that defects in the brain of children on the autism spectrum occur during pregnancy. Exposure during early pregnancy to particular chemicals in the environment or infections could be involved. Researchers have suggested that damage could be done by the drugs thalidomide, misoprostol and valproic acid; by exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos; and by infection of the mother with the rubella virus.

This is what we need to be focusing on, not the myth that vaccines cause autism. Yet I fear that such myths will be used to justify new rounds of hearings or unwarranted investigations of federal agencies, including the C.D.C. This would only distract attention from these agencies’ crucial work, and the real needs of families with children on the autism spectrum, such as mental health services, work-entry programs for adults and support for the research being done by the National Institutes of Health.

Today, parents in Texas have to live in fear that something as simple as a trip to the mall or the library could expose their babies to measles and that a broader outbreak could occur. Perpetuating phony theories about vaccines and autism isn’t going to help them — and it’s not going to help children on the autism spectrum, either.

 jasper76 wrote:
Very worrisome to me that Donald Trump sympathizes with the anti-vaccer crowd. These ideas kill people. I hope he's got someone in his bubble with some sense on the issue.

 jasper76 wrote:
Very worrisome to me that Donald Trump sympathizes with the anti-vaccer crowd. These ideas kill people. I hope he's got someone in his bubble with some sense on the issue.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Very worrisome to me that Donald Trump sympathizes with the anti-vaccer crowd. These ideas kill people. I hope he's got someone in his bubble with some sense on the issue.

And what's really sad is that so many people say that it is "the left" that is anti-vax. I guess we're gonna find out just how big the "Jesus is the only vaccine y'all need" crowd really is.

Prestor Jon wrote:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

Prestor Jon wrote:
Leaving the SJW stuff aside, the media is much more about following along with a given narrative then it is about researching actual truths and reporting accurate stories.

Spoiler:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Meanwhile.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/opinion/how-the-anti-vaxxers-are-winning.html?

HOUSTON — It’s looking as if 2017 could become the year when the anti-vaccination movement gains ascendancy in the United States and we begin to see a reversal of several decades in steady public health gains. The first blow will be measles outbreaks in America.

Measles is one of the most contagious and most lethal of all human diseases. A single person infected with the virus can infect more than a dozen unvaccinated people, typically infants too young to have received their first measles shot. Such high levels of transmissibility mean that when the percentage of children in a community who have received the measles vaccine falls below 90 percent to 95 percent, we can start to see major outbreaks, as in the 1950s when four million Americans a year were infected and 450 died. Worldwide, measles still kills around 100,000 children each year.

The myth that vaccines like the one that prevents measles are connected to autism has persisted despite rock-solid proof to the contrary. Donald Trump has given credence to such views in tweets and during a Republican debate, but as president he has said nothing to support vaccination opponents, so there is reason to hope that his views are changing.

However, a leading proponent of the link between vaccines and autism said he recently met with the president to discuss the creation of a presidential commission to investigate vaccine safety. Such a commission would be a throwback to the 2000s, when Representative Dan Burton of Indiana held fruitless hearings and conducted investigations on this topic. And a documentary alleging a conspiracy at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” has recently been shown around the country.

As a scientist leading global efforts to develop vaccines for neglected poverty-related diseases like schistosomiasis and Chagas’ disease, and as the dad of an adult daughter with autism and other disabilities, I’m worried that our nation’s health will soon be threatened because we have not stood up to the pseudoscience and fake conspiracy claims of this movement.

Texas, where I live and work, may be the first state to once again experience serious measles outbreaks. As of last fall, more than 45,000 children here had received nonmedical exemptions for their school vaccinations. A political action committee is raising money to protect this “conscientious exemption” loophole and to instruct parents on how to file for it. As a result, some public school systems in the state are coming dangerously close to the threshold when measles outbreaks can be expected, and a third of students at some private schools are unvaccinated.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has produced a 21-page document listing all of the studies clearly showing there is no link between vaccines and autism, in addition to more recent epidemiological studies involving hundreds of thousands of children or pregnant women that also refute any association. A study of infant rhesus monkeys also shows that vaccination does not produce neurobiological changes in the brain.

Vaccines are clearly not the reason children develop autism. So what is? There is strong evidence that genetics play a role, and that defects in the brain of children on the autism spectrum occur during pregnancy. Exposure during early pregnancy to particular chemicals in the environment or infections could be involved. Researchers have suggested that damage could be done by the drugs thalidomide, misoprostol and valproic acid; by exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos; and by infection of the mother with the rubella virus.

This is what we need to be focusing on, not the myth that vaccines cause autism. Yet I fear that such myths will be used to justify new rounds of hearings or unwarranted investigations of federal agencies, including the C.D.C. This would only distract attention from these agencies’ crucial work, and the real needs of families with children on the autism spectrum, such as mental health services, work-entry programs for adults and support for the research being done by the National Institutes of Health.

Today, parents in Texas have to live in fear that something as simple as a trip to the mall or the library could expose their babies to measles and that a broader outbreak could occur. Perpetuating phony theories about vaccines and autism isn’t going to help them — and it’s not going to help children on the autism spectrum, either.

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Very worrisome to me that Donald Trump sympathizes with the anti-vaccer crowd. These ideas kill people. I hope he's got someone in his bubble with some sense on the issue.

And what's really sad is that so many people say that it is "the left" that is anti-vax. I guess we're gonna find out just how big the "Jesus is the only vaccine y'all need" crowd really is.

 Frazzled wrote:

Spoiler:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Meanwhile.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/opinion/how-the-anti-vaxxers-are-winning.html?

HOUSTON — It’s looking as if 2017 could become the year when the anti-vaccination movement gains ascendancy in the United States and we begin to see a reversal of several decades in steady public health gains. The first blow will be measles outbreaks in America.

Measles is one of the most contagious and most lethal of all human diseases. A single person infected with the virus can infect more than a dozen unvaccinated people, typically infants too young to have received their first measles shot. Such high levels of transmissibility mean that when the percentage of children in a community who have received the measles vaccine falls below 90 percent to 95 percent, we can start to see major outbreaks, as in the 1950s when four million Americans a year were infected and 450 died. Worldwide, measles still kills around 100,000 children each year.

The myth that vaccines like the one that prevents measles are connected to autism has persisted despite rock-solid proof to the contrary. Donald Trump has given credence to such views in tweets and during a Republican debate, but as president he has said nothing to support vaccination opponents, so there is reason to hope that his views are changing.

However, a leading proponent of the link between vaccines and autism said he recently met with the president to discuss the creation of a presidential commission to investigate vaccine safety. Such a commission would be a throwback to the 2000s, when Representative Dan Burton of Indiana held fruitless hearings and conducted investigations on this topic. And a documentary alleging a conspiracy at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” has recently been shown around the country.

As a scientist leading global efforts to develop vaccines for neglected poverty-related diseases like schistosomiasis and Chagas’ disease, and as the dad of an adult daughter with autism and other disabilities, I’m worried that our nation’s health will soon be threatened because we have not stood up to the pseudoscience and fake conspiracy claims of this movement.

Texas, where I live and work, may be the first state to once again experience serious measles outbreaks. As of last fall, more than 45,000 children here had received nonmedical exemptions for their school vaccinations. A political action committee is raising money to protect this “conscientious exemption” loophole and to instruct parents on how to file for it. As a result, some public school systems in the state are coming dangerously close to the threshold when measles outbreaks can be expected, and a third of students at some private schools are unvaccinated.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has produced a 21-page document listing all of the studies clearly showing there is no link between vaccines and autism, in addition to more recent epidemiological studies involving hundreds of thousands of children or pregnant women that also refute any association. A study of infant rhesus monkeys also shows that vaccination does not produce neurobiological changes in the brain.

Vaccines are clearly not the reason children develop autism. So what is? There is strong evidence that genetics play a role, and that defects in the brain of children on the autism spectrum occur during pregnancy. Exposure during early pregnancy to particular chemicals in the environment or infections could be involved. Researchers have suggested that damage could be done by the drugs thalidomide, misoprostol and valproic acid; by exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos; and by infection of the mother with the rubella virus.

This is what we need to be focusing on, not the myth that vaccines cause autism. Yet I fear that such myths will be used to justify new rounds of hearings or unwarranted investigations of federal agencies, including the C.D.C. This would only distract attention from these agencies’ crucial work, and the real needs of families with children on the autism spectrum, such as mental health services, work-entry programs for adults and support for the research being done by the National Institutes of Health.

Today, parents in Texas have to live in fear that something as simple as a trip to the mall or the library could expose their babies to measles and that a broader outbreak could occur. Perpetuating phony theories about vaccines and autism isn’t going to help them — and it’s not going to help children on the autism spectrum, either.

There's also the issue that illegal aliens are bringing in formerly vaxxed out diseases. Hooping cough, TB, and measles are again a thing here because of that.

 jasper76 wrote:

 Ensis Ferrae wrote:

 jasper76 wrote:
Very worrisome to me that Donald Trump sympathizes with the anti-vaccer crowd. These ideas kill people. I hope he's got someone in his bubble with some sense on the issue.

And what's really sad is that so many people say that it is "the left" that is anti-vax. I guess we're gonna find out just how big the "Jesus is the only vaccine y'all need" crowd really is.

Yeah these ideas have found a home in several subcultures. Obviously this shouldn't be a partisan issue, but rather a public health issue.

 whembly wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:

Spoiler:

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Meanwhile.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/opinion/how-the-anti-vaxxers-are-winning.html?

HOUSTON — It’s looking as if 2017 could become the year when the anti-vaccination movement gains ascendancy in the United States and we begin to see a reversal of several decades in steady public health gains. The first blow will be measles outbreaks in America.

Measles is one of the most contagious and most lethal of all human diseases. A single person infected with the virus can infect more than a dozen unvaccinated people, typically infants too young to have received their first measles shot. Such high levels of transmissibility mean that when the percentage of children in a community who have received the measles vaccine falls below 90 percent to 95 percent, we can start to see major outbreaks, as in the 1950s when four million Americans a year were infected and 450 died. Worldwide, measles still kills around 100,000 children each year.

The myth that vaccines like the one that prevents measles are connected to autism has persisted despite rock-solid proof to the contrary. Donald Trump has given credence to such views in tweets and during a Republican debate, but as president he has said nothing to support vaccination opponents, so there is reason to hope that his views are changing.

However, a leading proponent of the link between vaccines and autism said he recently met with the president to discuss the creation of a presidential commission to investigate vaccine safety. Such a commission would be a throwback to the 2000s, when Representative Dan Burton of Indiana held fruitless hearings and conducted investigations on this topic. And a documentary alleging a conspiracy at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe,” has recently been shown around the country.

As a scientist leading global efforts to develop vaccines for neglected poverty-related diseases like schistosomiasis and Chagas’ disease, and as the dad of an adult daughter with autism and other disabilities, I’m worried that our nation’s health will soon be threatened because we have not stood up to the pseudoscience and fake conspiracy claims of this movement.

Texas, where I live and work, may be the first state to once again experience serious measles outbreaks. As of last fall, more than 45,000 children here had received nonmedical exemptions for their school vaccinations. A political action committee is raising money to protect this “conscientious exemption” loophole and to instruct parents on how to file for it. As a result, some public school systems in the state are coming dangerously close to the threshold when measles outbreaks can be expected, and a third of students at some private schools are unvaccinated.

The American Academy of Pediatrics has produced a 21-page document listing all of the studies clearly showing there is no link between vaccines and autism, in addition to more recent epidemiological studies involving hundreds of thousands of children or pregnant women that also refute any association. A study of infant rhesus monkeys also shows that vaccination does not produce neurobiological changes in the brain.

Vaccines are clearly not the reason children develop autism. So what is? There is strong evidence that genetics play a role, and that defects in the brain of children on the autism spectrum occur during pregnancy. Exposure during early pregnancy to particular chemicals in the environment or infections could be involved. Researchers have suggested that damage could be done by the drugs thalidomide, misoprostol and valproic acid; by exposure to the insecticide chlorpyrifos; and by infection of the mother with the rubella virus.

This is what we need to be focusing on, not the myth that vaccines cause autism. Yet I fear that such myths will be used to justify new rounds of hearings or unwarranted investigations of federal agencies, including the C.D.C. This would only distract attention from these agencies’ crucial work, and the real needs of families with children on the autism spectrum, such as mental health services, work-entry programs for adults and support for the research being done by the National Institutes of Health.

Today, parents in Texas have to live in fear that something as simple as a trip to the mall or the library could expose their babies to measles and that a broader outbreak could occur. Perpetuating phony theories about vaccines and autism isn’t going to help them — and it’s not going to help children on the autism spectrum, either.

There's also the issue that illegal aliens are bringing in formerly vaxxed out diseases. Hooping cough, TB, and measles are again a thing here because of that.

That's why there's calls from medical professional to require guest to bring immunization records, and vaccinate at ports of entries as needed.

Something when detaining illegals... at least vaccinate them before releasing them back to the public.

 Easy E wrote:
So, does anyone have any actual data about how we are getting worse education results? All I am seeing is people's feelings.

Last I had heard, our High School grad rates were up to 83%, the highest ever. So that means a lot more students are taking ACT/SAT testing than ever before, and the scores are relatively flat despite the increasing number of students taking the tests.


Grad rate:
http://www.npr.org/sections/ed/2016/10/17/498246451/the-high-school-graduation-reaches-a-record-high-again

Scores:
http://blog.prepscholar.com/average-sat-score-for-2015-2014-2013-and-earlier-years

None of this means that their are no problems, as their is still an achievement gap based on ethnicity/socio-econimic factors.

Overall, things have not been bad in the Education field at all. People only "Feel" like things are bad. I wonder why?

ending Sept. 30, 2014 -- the U.S. spent $40.8 billion on education. Going back 30 years, as Brat did, puts us in 1984 when federal spending on schools was $6.5 billion. Adjusted for inflation, that’s a 176 percent increase

the number of students in publicly-funded schools across the nation increased from 39.2 million in 1984 to a projected 50 million in 2014. Federal spending per student rose from $165 in 1984 to about $816 in 2014. Adjusted for inflation, that’s a 117 percent increase

Brat’s claim that test scores "have been flat" again comes from McCluskey’s 2012 Senate testimony. McCluskey said that between 1970 and 2010, math and reading scores on National Assessment of Educational Progress tests, "have been almost stagnant for 17-year-olds, the final product of our elementary and secondary system."

The NAEP, frequently called "The Nation’s Report Card," refers to a variety of tests given every four years to fourth, eighth and twelfth graders in a sampling of states. McCluskey focused on the "long-term trend" test for 17-year-olds, which since the early 1970s has measured achievement on an unchanged set of math and reading skills.

On the first NAEP reading test, in 1971, 17-year-olds had an average score of 285 on a scale of 500. On the most recent test, in 2012, the average was 287.

On the first math test, in 1973, the average was 304 and that inched to 306 in 2012.

The scores don’t change much if you measure them over the 30 years Brat mentions on Facebook. The average math score in 1982 was 298 and rose by eight points over the next three decades. The average reading score in 1984 -- the reading test wasn’t given in 1982 -- was 289 and fell by two points in 2012.

I'm sure that most of the Senate Democrats opposing Betsy DeVos think they are opposing an inexperienced billionaire whose secret dream is to loot public school coffers for...what, exactly? Some sort of bizarre right-wing agenda, I suppose. DeVos' brother did start the company called Blackwater, so maybe her dedication to giving poor kids more options than they would otherwise have is really a way of helping her bro staff his mercenary forces?

Or maybe it's just a more simple misunderstanding, one rooted in special-interest politics. The Democrats are closely allied with teachers unions, who threatened by any and all changes to the educational status quo. So of course they oppose Betsy DeVos and they will use any club on the ground to beat down her chances. But to the extent that DeVos—and Trump, too, who has been outspoken on the need for more school choice—are in favor of giving more students and more parents more choices when it comes educating their kids, they are on the side of the angels. A recent poll found that 68 percent of Americans favor expanding school choice, including 55 percent of self-described Democrats, 75 percent among Latinos, 75 percent among millennials, and 72 percent among blacks. Contemporary politics may not allow partisans to admit that (or even see it), but for those of us who are neither pro-Trump across the board or always anti-Democratic Party, the conversation surrounding the DeVos nomination is everything that's wrong with Washington.

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
That's different from a quid pro quo arrangement.

feth me I just burst out laughing, almost woke the baby.

We just went through a whole fething year of the right wing saying any money in to the Clinton Foundation was proof of something or other, and the left talking about how what you needed was an actual quid pro quo, otherwise you ain't got gak. Now there's a Republican in charge and oh my god holy gak will you look at that the right has adopted a very narrow definition of acceptable favours for cash. Who could have seen that coming?

Holy gak that's a lot of bull caca there seb.

There's a distinct difference from legal lobby groups/US citizens donating/lobbying a political party/elected officials to curry favors. That's de jour in politics.

In Clinton's case, it's about Clinton's abuse of her OFFICE to accept favors from FOREIGN NATIONALS in lieu of Foundation donations.

If you can't see the difference... I can't even...

Anyhow, moving past the Clinton Foundation conspiracy nonsense, and to Obama's actual appointments, Obama did reward significant contributors to his campaign with political appointments. I don't know if he appointed anyone who directly paid in big money, but there was more than a few who ran large donation lobbying efforts who were given diplomatic posts. That was gak, to put it bluntly. It is not good enough whenever someone closely connected to the money trough is moved in to a government position, it is far too open to corruption.

Trump has gone well past Obama's appointments. He is appointing someone that didn't just lobby for him, but directly paid in, and not to some backwater diplomatic posting, he's giving them a cabinet position.

Obama had several millionaire on his cabinet that donated to him...

One of the biggest beefs I have, and it's not unique to Obama/Trump, is that many of the ambassadorships are fraught with political cronies who contributed to the party/President.

And all the people who cheered him on for saying he'll drain the swamp seem rather okay with this.

One can quibble over DeVos' qualification... they do have merits.

But to chaulk this up as, "why you no mad at devo when you mad at clintoon?!?!?!?".... is simply partisan haranguing.

Prestor Jon wrote:

Spoiler:

http://reason.com/blog/2017/02/07/the-question-isnt-do-you-support-betsy-d

I'm sure that most of the Senate Democrats opposing Betsy DeVos think they are opposing an inexperienced billionaire whose secret dream is to loot public school coffers for...what, exactly? Some sort of bizarre right-wing agenda, I suppose. DeVos' brother did start the company called Blackwater, so maybe her dedication to giving poor kids more options than they would otherwise have is really a way of helping her bro staff his mercenary forces?

Or maybe it's just a more simple misunderstanding, one rooted in special-interest politics. The Democrats are closely allied with teachers unions, who threatened by any and all changes to the educational status quo. So of course they oppose Betsy DeVos and they will use any club on the ground to beat down her chances. But to the extent that DeVos—and Trump, too, who has been outspoken on the need for more school choice—are in favor of giving more students and more parents more choices when it comes educating their kids, they are on the side of the angels. A recent poll found that 68 percent of Americans favor expanding school choice, including 55 percent of self-described Democrats, 75 percent among Latinos, 75 percent among millennials, and 72 percent among blacks. Contemporary politics may not allow partisans to admit that (or even see it), but for those of us who are neither pro-Trump across the board or always anti-Democratic Party, the conversation surrounding the DeVos nomination is everything that's wrong with Washington.

 Kanluwen wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 sebster wrote:

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Prestor Jon wrote:
That's different from a quid pro quo arrangement.

feth me I just burst out laughing, almost woke the baby.

We just went through a whole fething year of the right wing saying any money in to the Clinton Foundation was proof of something or other, and the left talking about how what you needed was an actual quid pro quo, otherwise you ain't got gak. Now there's a Republican in charge and oh my god holy gak will you look at that the right has adopted a very narrow definition of acceptable favours for cash. Who could have seen that coming?

Holy gak that's a lot of bull caca there seb.

There's a distinct difference from legal lobby groups/US citizens donating/lobbying a political party/elected officials to curry favors. That's de jour in politics.

In Clinton's case, it's about Clinton's abuse of her OFFICE to accept favors from FOREIGN NATIONALS in lieu of Foundation donations.

If you can't see the difference... I can't even...

You mean like Trump's hotels being booked by foreign nationals/representatives?

Anyhow, moving past the Clinton Foundation conspiracy nonsense, and to Obama's actual appointments, Obama did reward significant contributors to his campaign with political appointments. I don't know if he appointed anyone who directly paid in big money, but there was more than a few who ran large donation lobbying efforts who were given diplomatic posts. That was gak, to put it bluntly. It is not good enough whenever someone closely connected to the money trough is moved in to a government position, it is far too open to corruption.

Trump has gone well past Obama's appointments. He is appointing someone that didn't just lobby for him, but directly paid in, and not to some backwater diplomatic posting, he's giving them a cabinet position.

Obama had several millionaire on his cabinet that donated to him...

One of the biggest beefs I have, and it's not unique to Obama/Trump, is that many of the ambassadorships are fraught with political cronies who contributed to the party/President.

And all the people who cheered him on for saying he'll drain the swamp seem rather okay with this.

One can quibble over DeVos' qualification... they do have merits.

But to chaulk this up as, "why you no mad at devo when you mad at clintoon?!?!?!?".... is simply partisan haranguing.

Well no, it's a great way to call people like yourself out for the sheer hypocrisy of partisanship.

DeVos has no business running a Dairy Queen, let alone the Department of Education.

 whembly wrote:
Okay. You can thank Harry Reid for allowing Trump/GOP senators to push through their nominees.