Children of soldiers being sent to Gulf being hassled by teachers... - Page 3

Gatekeeper · February 28, 2003, 03:08

Quote:

Originally posted by tandeetaylor
... And I know for a fact that, at least in Las Vegas, children are being taught in school that this is a just war. This is the problem that arises from government control of schools. ...

It's not so much the entity that is operating a school so much as it is the people w/i said entity. That's where problems can and do arise. It all comes down to the individual.

That said, I've noticed that FAUX News (Ha! I love that! Who coined it?) tends to get hysterical about things faster than, say, CNN. Bill O'Reilly comes to mind.

Gatekeeper

Imran Siddiqui · February 28, 2003, 03:11

O'Reilly's job is to get hysterical. That's why he beats CNN and MSNBC.

CNN's Crossfire is an example of a CNN program where the hosts go hysterical at the drop of a hat for ratings.

Sikander · February 28, 2003, 03:17

Quote:

Originally posted by Zkribbler

That's probably true. It's usually the liberals who are compassionate enough to work for teachers' wages in order to assure children are educated.

Conservatives probably take the position that, if children want a diploma badly enough, they should get a job and earn enough money to buy one.

And I thought that the original story was overblown! Way to punish my moderate impulses, I'll just go back to assuming that liberals run solely on emotion, the truth be damned.

Oerdin · February 28, 2003, 03:18

I would rather see a dead Iraqi; especially since the Iraqi would have died defending one of the most repugnant regimes on earth. Certainly Saddam is as bad as any dictator since Joseph Stalin and so anyone who helps to preserve such evil is not as worthy as someone who would help to bring it down. All people are not of equal worth dispite want socialists would say.

BTW CNN has twice the viewership of FOX news. That is simply the facts. I'd agree that O'Reilly is often more entertaining but he is still the underdog.

tandeetaylor · February 28, 2003, 03:21

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
I would rather see a dead Iraqi; especially since the Iraqi would have died defending one of the most repugnant regimes on earth. Certainly Saddam is as bad as any dictator since Joseph Stalin and so anyone who helps to preserve such evil is not as worthy as someone who would help to bring it down. All people are not of equal worth dispite want socialists would say.

That has got to be some of the most ****ed up logic I have ever seen. And shame on you.

Gatekeeper · February 28, 2003, 03:27

I$f| Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
O'Reilly's job is to get hysterical. That's why he beats CNN and MSNBC.[/quote]

I wish I could get paid a few million bucks a year to get hysterical while on the job. As it is now, they just stare at me or make fun of me (in a good-natured fashion).

Quote:

CNN's Crossfire is an example of a CNN program where the hosts go hysterical at the drop of a hat for ratings.

Ha, ha, ha. True, very true. That program cracks me up. I love the interaction between the hosts.

Gatekeeper

Shi Huangdi · February 28, 2003, 03:30

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,79857,00.html

Oerdin · February 28, 2003, 03:33

Quote:

Originally posted by tandeetaylor
That has got to be some of the most ****ed up logic I have ever seen. And shame on you.

No it is quite logical. An Iraqi which has used his life to defend a regime of evil is worth no more then your average Nazi. He has/is fighting to repress his own people and to preserve a regime which poison's the nation's minorities with gas. He has inocent blood on his hands so he is a criminal who is less valuable then a justice man who is attempting to end the evil.

Who is the better man; a man who serves evil or an man who strives to defeat evil?

tandeetaylor · February 28, 2003, 03:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
He has/is fighting to repress his own people and to preserve a regime which poison's the nation's minorities with gas.

But they're his people... So they don't matter....

And you didn't say, I'd rather see a fanatical Iraqi supporter of Saddam dead, or even, an Iraqi soldier, you said, an Iraqi. Which makes what you said very very disgusting.

And since soldiers in oppressed countries rarely have much of a choice about whether or not to fight, and, even if they do, have probably been brainwashed to some degree, I think it's disgusting to say that you'd like to see Iraqi soldiers dead too.

Ming · February 28, 2003, 03:48

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
BTW CNN has twice the viewership of FOX news. That is simply the facts. I'd agree that O'Reilly is often more entertaining but he is still the underdog.

In the past, I have shown the numbers that CNN was still ahead of Fox in terms of ratings. However, the final 2002 ratings show that CNN is no longer number one.

A quick story can be found here:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030103-6246169.htm

(I usually never would post a story from the Times, but it was the first I could find on a free site, and not one that requires a subscription. No matter the source, the numbers they provide are accurate)

As you can see... O'Reilly is no longer the underdog. He's now TOP DOG

Oerdin · February 28, 2003, 03:58

A conscripted soldier has a million ways to resist helping the evil regime; at its most perfect form he can surrender and cease to provide support for Saddam's evil. If he choices to continue helping Saddam's evil then he is no better then a Nazi who added and abetted Hitler in his dreams of evil conquest.

Wither Saddam is one of his people or not does not matter. Saddam deliberately killed Turkmen, Kurds, & Assyrians. Saddam deliberately killed Christians & Shiites. Saddam has deliberately executed or exiled everyone who posses any threat to his totalitarian regime and he has gassed innocent men, women, & children for the sole reason of their ethnic group. He is an evil man and anyone who would serve him has less value then a man who would help to over throw the evil.

Oerdin · February 28, 2003, 04:11

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming

In the past, I have shown the numbers that CNN was still ahead of Fox in terms of ratings. However, the final 2002 ratings show that CNN is no longer number one.

A quick story can be found here:

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030103-6246169.htm

(I usually never would post a story from the Times, but it was the first I could find on a free site, and not one that requires a subscription. No matter the source, the numbers they provide are accurate)

As you can see... O'Reilly is no longer the underdog. He's now TOP DOG

Alright Ming. I guess at the end of 2002 individual Fox show's eecked out ahead of CNN shows. Though
I wonder if this is only in the US and if this is only during th prime time shows. I suspect that CNN is still a more watched news source then FOX.

Ming · February 28, 2003, 04:40

Quote:

Originally posted by Oerdin
Alright Ming. I guess at the end of 2002 individual Fox show's eecked out ahead of CNN shows. Though
I wonder if this is only in the US and if this is only during th prime time shows. I suspect that CNN is still a more watched news source then FOX.

First... these are ONLY the US ratings.

Second... "eecked out", hardly. O'Reilly has over 2 million views vs Larry Kings 1.3 million.
On an average evening, Fox is now solidly beating CNN.

Third... This trend started back in Jan of 2002 when Fox beat CNN for the first month ever in Primetime.

Fourth... In the morning, Fox has a 33% viewing edge over CNN

I will see what I can dig up to prove either way which Network is "move viewed overall" (only for the US). The last time I provided the numbers, the answer was CNN.
But since then, their audience has taken a nose dive, and I suspect that it's very close, or that Fox now holds the advantage.

Ned · February 28, 2003, 05:42

On the original topic, I remain amazed and concerned on how current events and history is taught in school. I have seem some very amazing statements by people here on Apolyton concerning events of the last 40 years of which I am personally aware. The general trend is that the US is wrong, the US is the enemy, the US is responsible for every evil dictator and every torture or murder of a communist everywhere on the planet.

Tell me this is not true.

I first became aware of what was happening when my daughter returned home from school one day and informed me that John Kennedy was the greatest American president and that Nixon was the worst because he got us into the Vietnam war.

What the left is doing to America through its deliberate lies to our children is evil, IMHO. This is the prime reason, more than any other, that I have turned strongly against the public school system in the US.

TheStinger · February 28, 2003, 05:46

Fox is run by Rupert murdoch one of the most hypocritical men to have walked this planet, I would be very suspicious of its output

molly bloom · February 28, 2003, 19:55

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
The general trend is that the US is wrong, the US is the enemy, the US is responsible for every evil dictator and every torture or murder of a communist everywhere on the planet.

Tell me this is not true.

What the left is doing to America through its deliberate lies to our children is evil, IMHO. This is the prime reason, more than any other, that I have turned strongly against the public school system in the US.

Are the lies of the Right not also deliberately evil?
I'm sure Ned, if you really tried very hard, you could think of say, at least 5 or 6 regimes which the U.S. supported directly through military aid, indirectly with financial subsidies, intelligence, 'military' advisors, whose crimes against humanity you would consider evil.

('the US is responsible for every evil dictator'

No, Ned, just some on the United States' doorstep- Papa Doc in Haiti, the Somozas in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, the Castillo Armas regime in Guatemala, Trujillo in the Dominican Republic, just as starters.)

Having watched the likes of Oliver North testify and even a president of the United States affirm he 'didn't know what was going on' (gee, you're only supposed to be in charge, Mr. P.o.t.u.s.!) do you honestly believe the 'lies' are all on one side?

tandeetaylor · February 28, 2003, 20:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Ned
I first became aware of what was happening when my daughter returned home from school one day and informed me that John Kennedy was the greatest American president and that Nixon was the worst because he got us into the Vietnam war.

Take. your. children. out. of. public. schools.

It doesn't matter who is in charge, education is a propoganda tool, and whoever gets to will push their agenda.

Ben Kenobi · February 28, 2003, 20:37

Quote:

It doesn't matter who is in charge, education is a propoganda tool, and whoever gets to will push their agenda.

If the teacher agreed with you, would you pull your child out of the class?

The solution to teaching our children is not to put them in the 'proper' environment, but to teach them how to spot bias.

You can remove and remove, yet you will never find a school with teachers who all agree with you.

Sprayber · February 28, 2003, 20:55

I think teachers should be more concerned about their students knowing how to read, write, and solve math problems instead of discussing politics. Your kids should tell their teachers to keep their opinions to themselves and get back to the math problem on the chalk board.

Oerdin · February 28, 2003, 22:08

Spraybar:

If a teacher is going to spout off about politics then he should at least have a vague understanding about what he is talking about. Nixon started the Viet Nam war?!?! That fool obviously has no clue about history and I wonder why the hell we trust him to teach children.

The problem is the government pays teachers crap and treats them like garbage so everyone with any talent leaves. All that is left are the idealistic leftists and hide bound bureaucrats who can't hack it in the private sector. The lefties want to make the world a better place so they over look the poor pay while the bureaucrats know they can't do any better; many from both group really aren't knowledgeable enough to be good teachers.

GePap · February 28, 2003, 22:22

Faux News is the reason CNN put in Connie Chung, cause they want to return to ratings primacy, which left some of the old guard at CNN angry since they do want to see themselves as "real news" and not salacious like Faux. Because Faux has close firend in this admin. they can get scoops no one else can" besides that, they are, to me, an absolute joke.

Lancer · February 28, 2003, 22:43

Sikander, everyone gets to exaggerate now and again. Zkribbler rarely does, so I'd just take the statement as frustration with what he sees wrong with the world. The guy is much more than a political animal looking for a troll. He puts his hard earned money into his beliefs. He's real.

Sheik · February 28, 2003, 23:15

I live in Cumberland, Maine (about 20 minutes from Portland) and have heard different reports. Some say it isn't really teachers but is a problem with teachers assistants. However, I can tell you that teachers here, especially in the Cumberland district, are very liberal. It wouldn't surprise me if they are telling the kids these things. Either way it is awful and needs to stop. Teachers should be completely nuetral on all political issues, and if they decide to voice an opinion they should be teaching kids old enough to formulate their own ideas. I guess the problem was found to be big around the 2nd grade.

ThePantaloonDog · March 1, 2003, 00:57

Well on the one hand teachers from Maine are telling kids that their parents are supporting an unjust war, which is bad.

On the other hand Maine teachers taught me how to read in the first grade, something I doubt Baltimore teachers would have ever accomplished, which is good.

But on the other hand Mainers use the word 'wicked' an obscene amount of times, which is annoying.

And I had to learn a song for all of the Maine counties, which haunts me to this day.

So in conclusion, firebomb Lewiston as a warning and threaten to send O'Reilly to the borders, we gotta keep those dirty illegal Canadians out.

uh Clem · March 1, 2003, 08:20

Quote:

However, I can tell you that teachers here, especially in the Cumberland district, are very liberal.

???

Compared to what, and defined how?

BTW, I don't know if the Cumberland district means Cumberland county (Portland), but I see that Cumberland voted 52% for Gore and another 6% for Nader in 2000. So moderate to liberal would merely be reflecting community values. The anomaly would be if the teachers were conservative.