Awww! The Obama Administation has fallen in love with our children. They want to spend more and more time with them.
But, is it the education of our children that they long for or the drilling of their radical leftist agenda down their throats?
Watch from Human Events:
Read the following comment from Human Events:
"As a teacher, I can't tell you how much of the 'America Sucks' attitude and teaching is already in our classrooms. I try to resist this at every turn, but it can be overwhelming. Parents resist this with all your resourses."
I told you so!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
This guy's a joke. He's making a pretty penny feeding a line of crap to you rughtwingnuts, and you're eating it up with a spoon.
By all means, keep your kids home, under their covers, if you're concerned that they might learn that America is not always perfect and that we should acknowledge some of our shortcomings. Foreigners don't refer to "the Ugly American" without some basis in fact.
If you want white-washed (pun intended) history, feed 'em the homeskool Americun Histry texts from the Aryan Christian Brotherhood.
DiogenASS: Anything taught in school, can also be taught at home without all the liberal leftwing interpretations and bias of American historical facts.
How many children learn in public school that blacks founded the Texas Republican Party? On July 4, 1867, in Houston, Texas, 150 blacks and 20 whites formed the party. No, not the Black Texas Republican Party, they founded the Texas Republican Party. Blacks across Southern states also founded the Republican parties in their states.
How many children learn in public school that Martin Luther King was actually a Republican?
How many children learn in public school that following the Civil War, 23 blacks -- 13 of them ex-slaves -- were elected to Congress, all as Republicans? The first black Democrat was not elected to Congress until 1935, from the state of Illinois. The first black congressional Democrat from a Southern state was not elected until 1973.
How many children learn in public schools that Democrat FDR put thousands of American Japanese in interment camps in 1942?
How many children learn in public school that the Ku Klux Klan was established by the Democratic Party, the Ku Klux Klan murdered thousands of Republicans — African-American and white – in the years following the Civil War and the Republican Party and a Republican President, Ulysses Grant,destroyed the KKK with their Ku Klux Klan Act of 1871.
How many children learn in public school that It was a racist Democrat President, Woodrow Wilson, who premiered Birth of a Nation in the White House.
That racist movie was based on a racist book written by one of Wilson’s racist friends from college. In 1915, the movie spawned the modern-day Klan, with its burning crosses and white sheets.
How many children learn in public school that In the 1930s, a Democrat President, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, appointed a Klansman, Senator Hugo Black (D-AL), to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the 1950s, the Klansmen against whom the civil rights movement struggled were Democrats.
Speaking more Truth to Power, the Republican Party has been a resolute enemy of the Ku Klux Klan, terrorist wing of the Democratic Party.
It doesn't fit the leftwing liberals victim hood narrative or agenda.
Some of America's first school books were bibles, don't you think morality is more edifying and important to the child’s development then the homosexual perversion and America is an evil capitalist country thats taught in our schools today?
after all, children knowing how many orifices on a persons body and what sexual positions used for pleasure is more important then teaching children to be good productive moral individuals.
Riiiiiight!
I am continually amazed at the rewriting of history by the radical left, they can't handle the truth or face their own demons before the world!
AnonyMouse you couldn't teach shit to the Roto-Rooter man!
As for your rhetorical questions:
Who cares who started the Texas Republican Party, unless you live in Texas (maybe)? Now, we most certainly DO get into how the first elected black politicians were Republicans during the Reconstruction era. And we talk about WHY they were elected, which you didn't mention in your diatribe. Do you know why? Because whites who fought in or supported the COnfederate Army during the Civil War were stripped of their citizenship and their right to vote. The only people voting in Southern states, then, were newly enfranchised blacks. And they quite properly elected other blacks. And why were they Republicans? Because Lincoln was a Republican. What you also failed to note is that not a single black politician was elected to Congress or any other major post in any NORTHERN city... since there were plenty of white Republicans (and Democrats) that had a lock on all elected positions. And you also forgot to mention why the electionof black Republicans came to a screeching halt right around 1877. It's because the Republican presidential nominee, Ritherford B. Hayes, was deadlocked with the Democrat Samuel Tilden. And Hayes and the Republicans promised the Dems that, if they allowed Hayes to become President, Hayes and the Republicans would then end Reconstruction.... leaving all those blacks (politicians and non-politicians) hanging out to dry. THAT'S what we teach about Reconstruction: white politicians(Republican OR Democratic) will sell out blacks in a heartbeat if need be.
As for Woodrow Wilson, I personally note in my classes that most historians label Wilson as one of the most racist if not THE most racist, President in history. As for "Birth of a Nation", no... it's not even worth the time to mention it.
Hugo Black wound up being a pretty fine Supreme Court justice. But, in a broad overview of American History, he doesn't get mentioned, one way or another.
The Klan? Yep. Democrat. Texas ex-Confederate general named Nathan Bedford Forrest... crazier than hell.
150-200 years ago, the more racist party was certainly the Democratic Party, which dominated the South. In the last 50 years, though, the South has turned to the Repubican Party and is solidly red state. Funny thing, though, is that peoples' racial prejudices didn't disappear when they changed party affiliations. People are people.
As for your continued sexual references, I leave you to decide what parts go where. Deciding where you put them isn't exactly an IQ test... so have at it!
DiogenASS: Now that Republicans have taken over the southern states, I don't recall seeing segregated schools, drinking fountains, toilets or restaurants lately.
If I'm correct, blacks to the back of the bus and the hangings only happened during the democrats reign over the south.
So, I guess you're right, the southern states have become more civilized now that the racist democrats have moved north.
Are you intentionally trying to be dense,AnonyMous? Because you don't really have to... the denseness you have naturally is more than enough.
The changeover occurred in the 1960s. Yes, the white Democratic political establishment, up until the 1960s, continued institutional segregation. But the Demcratic Party -- particularly some staunch southern Democrats like LBJ -- turned it around. As a result, you had the last vestiges of white racist Southern politicians (like George Wallace and Lester Maddox)running as independents, and Nixon started to turn the South to the GOP in 1968 and partcularly in 1972.
Once again-- hopefully you'll understand it this time -- the PEOPLE didn't move geographically speaking. Southerners didn't suddenly move North. The PEOPLE moved politically, from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party... guys like Strom Thurmond, etc etc Thurmond ran for President as a States Right Democrat (Dixiecrat) in 1948, but switched his party affiliation in 1964 to the Republican Party.
AnonyMouse, try linking up to your favorite website, Wikipedia, to understand the so-called"Southern strategy" of Nixon and the Republican Party:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy
(Damn, trying to educate a brick is easier than imparting even a little knowledge to you, AnonyMouse.)
DiogenASS: don't you think it's significant that blacks were welcome by a political party and part of the political system with a voice on July 4, 1867 back when racial divisions and prejudices were high?
After all isn’t it important when teaching children that not everybody was a racist like the democrats in American history?
By the way, Didn't you know that Texas's admission to Union was on December 29, 1845 (28th) and
was part of America and it's history on July 4, 1867?
so, why would it only be important to Texans and not all Americans?
As far as leaving “those blacks hanging out to dry” (on trees), the democrats were mainly responsible for those crimes.
Ohhhh wellll..........
You can lead an AnonyMouse to education, but you can't make him think!
DiogenASS: That's what I meant you idiot, I didn't mean physically moving north, you dope!
I meant a generation died off and adopted a civilized and less racist ideology and political party, while the people in the north adopted the same racist democrat ideology and mentality of the old southern states, by keeping the slave voters in check with massive entitlement programs, housing projects and food stamps.
Is that any different from a plantation environment, minus the whippings, beatings and killings?
Substitute working the “fields” with working the “voters” for housing, food and money.
Now the democrats have them in the housing projects (plantation) beating and killing themselves, go figure.
Yeah,you got it all figgered out, AnonyMouse:
It's just like slavery, except for the slavery part.
If you had ANY IDEA what slavery was like, you'd no better than to make casually stupid comments like that. While it may serve your cheap political rhetoric, there's nothing remotely like slavery nowadays. And the socioeconomic issues that surround the racial minority communities of this country aren't wholly caused by any one political party. Democrats AND Republicans have dirty hands on that.
It's not really about black and white, or even Democrat and Republican. It's about those in power and those not... the haves and the have-nots.
Post a Comment