Let it speak for itself

[kroxquo]

krox-Also out in the real world, last semester while teaching my civics class in rural North Carolina, the subject of policing came up. I asked my classes how many of them had had "The Talk" - how to behave if stopped by the police. EVERY SINGLE ONE of the Black students (high school sophomores and juniors) had, along with some of the Hispanics. Only one of the white students had (that student's father is a sheriff's deputy). I would love to live in a world where racism both individually and systemically, doesn't exist, but we are not there, and until we do, not to shine a light on it is to tacitly condone it.

Come to think of it, krox, you teach civics. Is it a public school? Would you be willing to share your syllabus or lesson plans for the semester? I would be interested in seeing what is being taught in civics classes these days.

The school where I teach is a small, rural public high school - graduating class of 50-some. It is the only high school in the county, which is in the bottom 5 in per capita income of the 100 counties in North Carolina. Racially, the breakdown is about 10% Hispanic with the rest about evenly split between white and black. The building itself is brand new having opened in 2019. The old building was completely destroyed by flooding during Hurricane Florence and so thanks to grant money and FEMA recovery funds, we have a new state f the art building, completely powered by solar energy. We are a Title I school which means that all students receive free breakfast and lunch.

This is the link to the NC Standard Course of Study, which I am required by law to follow:
https://www.dpi.nc.gov/founding-princip ... -2021/open

As an example of what I teach, today we were discussing the Constitutional Convention and the various compromises necessary to get it passed including the Great Compromise and the 3/5 Compromise.

And believe me. If I had time or inclination to indoctrinate my students to anything, I would indoctrinate them to be respectful, get their work done, and bring me hot chocolate in the morning.

[flockofseagulls104]

This is the link to the NC Standard Course of Study, which I am required by law to follow:
https://www.dpi.nc.gov/founding-princip ... -2021/open

After reading that course of study, I can understand how students would come out of it with a negative view of their country. Especially depending upon the personal views of the instructor. In every section there is a point that divides people into victim groups. Is our country really about nothing but various "...isms"?

Yes, slavery, injustice and discrimination has been a part of our history, and still exists, and unless we manage to breed a whole country of perfect people, will always exist. But do we have to emphasize that in every category? Yes, we need to talk about our inglorious past, but if we are going to do that, how about we emphasize how far we've come, and that we are a country that tries to learn from our mistakes? And how it's apparent that people from all over the world aspire to come here because everyone has the opportunity (not the guarantee), to live up to their potential, which is not the case in much of the rest of the world.

Just my take on it. My civics education was a bit different.

[silverscreenselect]

My civics education was a bit different.

That probably explains a lot about your present-day viewpoint. Life is so much easier when you whitewash everything messy and inconvenient out of it.

And I had much the same education in Florida in the 1960s. When we discussed slavery, it was listed as just one of several differences between the North and South in the antebellum era. I think tariffs were another, and in each case, our teacher showed us how North and South differed and how the West (which in those days meant states like Kentucky and Missouri) sometimes agreed with the North and sometimes the South. One thing was for sure; we didn't get any discussion of the real horrors of slavery.

[earendel]

So you admit that the only reason there is opposition to the bill is because Trump doesn't like it?

Did you read what I posted? I said that there are several reasons, including some who don't want additional funding for Ukraine, some who are opposed for budgetary reasons (the same ones who are rejecting the compromise that Speaker Johnson and the White House reached), and some have decided to resist because Trump doesn't want the bill.

The uniparty has always relied on the naivety of the general public. They give attractive names to bills that are the exact opposite of what is actually in the bill. Just one example for you, ear, they sell it as 'We will only let 5000 people in a day'. Sounds reasonable at first glance. You quoted it, so you seem to think that's ok. Do you realize that is almost 2 million a year? Adding a large major city of loosely vetted individuals into the country every year? Not to mention the history of the administration ignoring border laws when they disagree with them? Would you support it if they told you that?

Are you suggesting that the border should be completely closed and no one should be admitted? As for ignoring laws, how about Texas governor Abbot ignoring the decision of the Supreme Court regarding the removal of razor wire?

The devil is in the details, and we, the public, never get to examine the details. This bill has a lot of other things in it, including more funding for NGOs, which have been the biggest organizers of illegal immigrant caravans. The opponents say it is another typical backroom deal, filled with gifts and millions of dollars for totally unrelated things. That's what congress and the swamp does. Systematic obfuscation. And the opposition says it codifies the 'invasion', tying the hands of anyone else who might have a better more permanent solution.

Maybe we should just plant mines all along the border, build guard towers and give shoot to kill orders to those stationed in them. Call in air strikes against large groups.

And there is no 'news feed' that is gospel truth anymore, ear. But if you rely solely on the MSM, you are only getting one side. I try to hear the propaganda from many different 'news feeds', all with grains of salt, and try to determine for myself which has the most logical and better argument. And the MSM fails the test most of the time, because I have conservative values, and they completely dismiss and censor news and paints conservative news in a negative light. I have to get any news that the swamp disapproves of from 'conservative media' or off-the-grid sources. But I can never be sure that they are reporting the truth, either. I try and verify myself, if I can, and try and determine who is closest to telling the whole truth.

I have yet to see you disparage any of the sources you link to - Breitbart, FOX news, etc. It's always "the MSM" that you complain about. So perhaps I'll start using "the Right Wing Media (RWM)" to refer to those you cite and dismiss them with the same disdain that you dismiss the mainstream media.

[earendel]

And how it's apparent that people from all over the world aspire to come here because everyone has the opportunity (not the guarantee), to live up to their potential, which is not the case in much of the rest of the world.

Let them aspire all they want, but by all means don't let them in. Right?

[flockofseagulls104]

Ear, I have assumed you are a reasonable person. Your latest posts are getting me to rethink that.

Let them aspire all they want, but by all means don't let them in. Right?

Surely you are aware that there is a legal immigration process? It has been used successfully by many of our citizens. Many are still in waiting, but those that come here illegally are making a mockery of it. You know that. So you post the above?

Maybe we should just plant mines all along the border, build guard towers and give shoot to kill orders to those stationed in them. Call in air strikes against large groups.

You sound like trollboy and BJ with this one. No, actually secure our border like all other countries do. Ensure the best we can that we KNOW who enters our country and for what reason. Trump had that put in place and all biden had to do was nothing. But he dismantled it on the first day of his administration.

I have yet to see you disparage any of the sources you link to - Breitbart, FOX news, etc. It's always "the MSM" that you complain about. So perhaps I'll start using "the Right Wing Media (RWM)" to refer to those you cite and dismiss them with the same disdain that you dismiss the mainstream media.

Maybe you should read my posts.

[flockofseagulls104]

Nothing to see here.
Just what the swamp is telling you is not happening.

BTW, That's Colton Moore, one of our State Senators, who was kicked out of the Republican Caucus because he wanted to have Fani Willis investigated. 6 ways from Sunday

[earendel]

Surely you are aware that there is a legal immigration process? It has been used successfully by many of our citizens. Many are still in waiting, but those that come here illegally are making a mockery of it. You know that. So you post the above?

Yes, there is a legal path to immigration. And there is a process for dealing with those who cross. But there are not enough immigration judges to hear the cases.

Maybe we should just plant mines all along the border, build guard towers and give shoot to kill orders to those stationed in them. Call in air strikes against large groups.

You sound like trollboy and BJ with this one. No, actually secure our border like all other countries do. Ensure the best we can that we KNOW who enters our country and for what reason. Trump had that put in place and all biden had to do was nothing. But he dismantled it on the first day of his administration.

I should have used sarcafont for that comment.

I have yet to see you disparage any of the sources you link to - Breitbart, FOX news, etc. It's always "the MSM" that you complain about. So perhaps I'll start using "the Right Wing Media (RWM)" to refer to those you cite and dismiss them with the same disdain that you dismiss the mainstream media.

Maybe you should read my posts.

You think I don't? But in case I overlooked something, please point me to one of your posts where you accused one of the RWM sources you cite as being "fake news" or part of "the swamp" or whatever.

[flockofseagulls104]

Surely you are aware that there is a legal immigration process? It has been used successfully by many of our citizens. Many are still in waiting, but those that come here illegally are making a mockery of it. You know that. So you post the above?

Yes, there is a legal path to immigration. And there is a process for dealing with those who cross. But there are not enough immigration judges to hear the cases.

Maybe we should just plant mines all along the border, build guard towers and give shoot to kill orders to those stationed in them. Call in air strikes against large groups.

You sound like trollboy and BJ with this one. No, actually secure our border like all other countries do. Ensure the best we can that we KNOW who enters our country and for what reason. Trump had that put in place and all biden had to do was nothing. But he dismantled it on the first day of his administration.

I should have used sarcafont for that comment.

I have yet to see you disparage any of the sources you link to - Breitbart, FOX news, etc. It's always "the MSM" that you complain about. So perhaps I'll start using "the Right Wing Media (RWM)" to refer to those you cite and dismiss them with the same disdain that you dismiss the mainstream media.

Maybe you should read my posts.

You think I don't? But in case I overlooked something, please point me to one of your posts where you accused one of the RWM sources you cite as being "fake news" or part of "the swamp" or whatever.

I have repeatedly said that the news media, all of it, is based on demographics and profit. Any news source has its target audience. I take any news report with several grains of salt. However, the MSM: ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN,AP, Reuters,NYT,WP the social media Google, Yahoo, Youtube, Facebook, you name it, are a monolithic conglomerate. They all have been co-opted by the same leftist, liberal narratives. They all report the 'news' with the same narratives, and censor or ignore news contrary to their opinion of what is 'news'.

When I was young, we had the idea that if you saw it on the news, it had to be true. That is not the case anymore, but most people still have that idea. The left likes to imagine that the 'Russians' hacked our social media in order for Trump to be elected President. Nobody considers that maybe OUR social media is being used to influence the behavior of our citizens by our OWN powers that be.

Anyway, I have repeatedly stated that I try and absorb the 'news' being presented from many sources and decide for myself what holds the most water. The MSM is, unfortunately, the 'news' that is disseminated most widely and what most of the casual masses get exposed to. And it is extremely one-sided. I have the same view that the non-MSM news sources are one-sided. but they report news that the MSM ignores or categorizes as 'debunked' based on their political narratives. I will decide for myself, thank you.

[Bob78164]

You think I don't? But in case I overlooked something, please point me to one of your posts where you accused one of the RWM sources you cite as being "fake news" or part of "the swamp" or whatever.

Facts have a well known liberal bias. --Bob

[flockofseagulls104]

You think I don't? But in case I overlooked something, please point me to one of your posts where you accused one of the RWM sources you cite as being "fake news" or part of "the swamp" or whatever.

Facts have a well known liberal bias. --Bob

And so do you, so I take that into account in everything you post.

[flockofseagulls104]

While the biden admin is trafficking illegals all over the country with help from well-funded NGOs, we feel the effect here in Georgia, where the ones who aren't strawberry pickers, people to fund our social security and workers to man the farms in boobie's state are doing other things. Of course, this guy is probably lying. trollboy will find conflicting information on the internet for us.

[Beebs52]

Ear

"Yes, there is a legal path to immigration. And there is a process for dealing with those who cross. But there are not enough immigration judges to hear the cases."

So what? Does that make thousands who enter illegally okay?

[Bob78164]

Ear

"Yes, there is a legal path to immigration. And there is a process for dealing with those who cross. But there are not enough immigration judges to hear the cases."

So what? Does that make thousands who enter illegally okay?

If they're seeking asylum, they're not entering illegally.

The United States is party to a treaty, duly ratified by the Senate, regarding people seeking asylum. The treaty says that such a person can enter the country ANYWHERE, whether or not at a legal port of entry, as long as they turn themselves over to appropriate authorities as soon as practical after crossing the border. That treaty obligation is was implemented by an Act of Congress, duly enacted into law by the President's signature.

So anyone seeking asylum is LEGALLY entitled to enter the country anywhere they can. It's up to us to adjudicate their claim. When Donny decided to throw people seeking asylum out of the country before their claims could be adjudicated, he was breaking the law. --Bob

[Beebs52]

"Yes, seeking asylum is legal. Asylum seekers must be in the U.S. or at a port of entry (an airport or an official land crossing) to request the opportunity to apply for asylum.
https://www.rescue.org/article/it-legal ... eek-asylum"

"Who Cannot apply for asylum in USA?"
"You will be barred from being granted asylum if you: Ordered, incited, assisted, or participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Were convicted of a serious crime (including aggravated felonies)Sep 11, 2023"

[tlynn78]

You think I don't? But in case I overlooked something, please point me to one of your posts where you accused one of the RWM sources you cite as being "fake news" or part of "the swamp" or whatever.

Facts have a well known liberal bias. --Bob

And so do you, so I take that into account in everything you post.

Liberal "facts" like "Russian collusion"? "Men can have babies"? "Hunter's laptop is fake"? "I did not have sex with that woman"? I'm not surprised Bobbo is confused.

[flockofseagulls104]

So many things that speak for themselves.

Here is a prime example of a swamp creature. Individually, he is probably a nice, decent guy. But he's part of the Washington DC environment and culture, which is about THEM and not US. And there's thousands just like him, just going along with it, because that is what is done. Disseminating their disinformation and indoctrinating the dumb masses, even though they know it is all bullshit.

[silverscreenselect]

So many things that speak for themselves.

Here is a prime example of a swamp creature. Individually, he is probably a nice, decent guy. But he's part of the Washington DC environment and culture, which is about THEM and not US. And there's thousands just like him, just going along with it, because that is what is done. Disseminating their disinformation and indoctrinating the dumb masses, even though they know it is all bullshit.

Interesting that I couldn't find anything about this "Charlie Kraiger" anywhere online before two days ago. He had a LinkedIn profile, now deleted, that said he was a " Cybersecurity Policy Analyst and Foreign Affairs Desk Officer in the Executive Office of the President since December 2020." But there were no references in news articles, nothing. The only person's word we have to go on about what he does or that he's a "top campaign official" is Kraiger himself. This sounds like some low-level analyst trying to make himself appear more important than he is to impress what he thinks is a gay pickup. Dumb on his part, but not a shocking revelation from the Biden inner circle.

[Bob78164]

"Yes, seeking asylum is legal. Asylum seekers must be in the U.S. or at a port of entry (an airport or an official land crossing) to request the opportunity to apply for asylum.
https://www.rescue.org/article/it-legal ... eek-asylum"

"Who Cannot apply for asylum in USA?"
"You will be barred from being granted asylum if you: Ordered, incited, assisted, or participated in the persecution of any person on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. Were convicted of a serious crime (including aggravated felonies)Sep 11, 2023"

It's not just seeking asylum that's legal. So is entering the country somewhere other than a port of entry in order to request asylum, as long as you turn yourself in as soon as practical after entering the country. So anyone who enters the country ANYWHERE AT ALL in order to request asylum is acting completely legally, according to both a treaty that the Senate duly ratified and by an actual law enacted by Congress and signed by the President. --Bob

[Bob78164]

Interesting that I couldn't find anything about this "Charlie Kraiger" anywhere online before two days ago. He had a LinkedIn profile, now deleted, that said he was a "Cybersecurity Policy Analyst and Foreign Affairs Desk Officer in the Executive Office of the President since December 2020." But there were no references in news articles, nothing. The only person's word we have to go on about what he does or that he's a "top campaign official" is Kraiger himself. This sounds like some low-level analyst trying to make himself appear more important than he is to impress what he thinks is a gay pickup. Dumb on his part, but not a shocking revelation from the Biden inner circle.

You overlooked that the video was posted by James O'Keefe of Project Veritas infamy. Pretty good chance, consistent with his prior conduct, that the video was edited to make it materially different from what they guy (whoever he is) actually said. --Bob

[tlynn78]

Gosh, did y'all see the video of those 7 poor, innocent asylum-seekers getting their hands and feet beat up by the two NYC officers faces? We should probably be deporting LEOs to make room for more of those asylum-seekers.

[flockofseagulls104]

Interesting that I couldn't find anything about this "Charlie Kraiger" anywhere online before two days ago. He had a LinkedIn profile, now deleted, that said he was a "Cybersecurity Policy Analyst and Foreign Affairs Desk Officer in the Executive Office of the President since December 2020." But there were no references in news articles, nothing. The only person's word we have to go on about what he does or that he's a "top campaign official" is Kraiger himself. This sounds like some low-level analyst trying to make himself appear more important than he is to impress what he thinks is a gay pickup. Dumb on his part, but not a shocking revelation from the Biden inner circle.

You overlooked that the video was posted by James O'Keefe of Project Veritas infamy. Pretty good chance, consistent with his prior conduct, that the video was edited to make it materially different from what they guy (whoever he is) actually said. --Bob

Yup! All made up! Creatively edited! That's the ticket! Geez, you guys forgot a link to some leftist debunking expert. Forget about it and get back to the important stuff. Making up stuff to charge Trump with!

How they can know that useful idiots like you guys will go to the lengths you do to keep yourself deluded is astonishing. If this was the other way around, I can imagine the chastisement you'd direct at me for responding like you both just did.

[tlynn78]

Interesting that I couldn't find anything about this "Charlie Kraiger" anywhere online before two days ago. He had a LinkedIn profile, now deleted, that said he was a "Cybersecurity Policy Analyst and Foreign Affairs Desk Officer in the Executive Office of the President since December 2020." But there were no references in news articles, nothing. The only person's word we have to go on about what he does or that he's a "top campaign official" is Kraiger himself. This sounds like some low-level analyst trying to make himself appear more important than he is to impress what he thinks is a gay pickup. Dumb on his part, but not a shocking revelation from the Biden inner circle.

You overlooked that the video was posted by James O'Keefe of Project Veritas infamy. Pretty good chance, consistent with his prior conduct, that the video was edited to make it materially different from what they guy (whoever he is) actually said. --Bob

Yup! All made up! Creatively edited! That's the ticket! Geez, you guys forgot a link to some leftist debunking expert. Forget about it and get back to the important stuff. Making up stuff to charge Trump with!

How they can know that useful idiots like you guys will go to the lengths you do to keep yourself deluded is astonishing. If this was the other way around, I can imagine the chastisement you'd direct at me for responding like you both just did.

My son and I were just talking about this; he mentioned his astonishment at how some on the left are still ridin' with Biden. I reminded him how if they admit what he is they have to accept their own wrongness, and most of them are incapable.

[silverscreenselect]

My son and I were just talking about this; he mentioned his astonishment at how some on the left are still ridin' with Biden. I reminded him how if they admit what he is they have to accept their own wrongness, and most of them are incapable.

My daughter and I were just talking about this; she mentioned her astonishment at how some on the right are still giving credence to anything James O'Keefe says considering how he's been fired from Project Veritas, the organization he founded (one of whose board members called him a lying sack of shit), and sued by them, how their audits showed he had diverted large sums of money from the organization for personal purposes so that Project Veritas is now virtually bankrupt, how he's been thoroughly discredited in his so-called exposes on multiple occasions, and is under investigation by the Westchester County NY DA for criminal fraud. I reminded her that if they admit what O'Keefe is, they have to accept that they once again have nothing of substance about Biden and will have to accept their own wrongness, and most of them are incapable.

[flockofseagulls104]

how he's been thoroughly discredited

.. By who - evidence please