Well, ok. I know my current local high school's pretty good, which is one reason I live here, but the public schools where I grew up were bad and likely still are. Not sure about the rest of the state tbh.
Printable View
Well, ok. I know my current local high school's pretty good, which is one reason I live here, but the public schools where I grew up were bad and likely still are. Not sure about the rest of the state tbh.
Once more you attack the messenger and not the actual message that is being made. If it is a fact that there are liberals who are attempting to infiltrate the tea parties and make them look bad then it doesn't matter if the source is Fox News or MSNBC.Quote:
Breitbart has been proved to be a lying snake. Fox has essentially joined the Tea Party movement, and CBN is always 100% conservative 100% of the time. You've quoted yourself the OJ Simpsons of media.
BTW Tear care to make a list of all "acceptable" news sources? What news sites, news shows, papers and/or programs are fair, balanced and objective?
Again, the party you support, and the holders of your ideology, contain racists, corruption, and examples of mismanagement too. These things are not solely a construct or result of Democrats or liberalism. :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Also, on the topic being discussed related to the OP...
:noob:Quote:
Well we are living here in Allentown
And they're closing all the factories down
Out in Bethlehem they're killing time
Filling out forms, standing in line
Well our fathers fought the Second World War
Spent their weekends on the Jersey Shore
Met our mothers at the USO
Asked them to dance, danced with them slow
And we're living here in Allentown
But the restlessness was handed down
And it's getting very hard to stay
Well we're waiting here in Allentown for the Pennsylvania we never found
For the promises our teachers gave if we worked hard, if we behaved
So the graduations hang on the wall but they never really helped us at all
No they never taught us what was real
Iron and coke, chromium steel
And we're waiting here in Allentown
But they've taken all the coal from the ground
And the union people crawled away
Every child had a pretty good shot to get at least as far as their old man got
Something happened on the way to that place
They threw an American flag in our face
Well, I'm living here in Allentown
And it's hard to keep a good man down
But I won't be getting up today
And it's getting very hard to stay
And we're living here in Allentown
Edit: It seems more like if you have an industry that has existed in a certain area for a decent amount of time, for instance decades, and relies solely on unskilled labor, like coal mining, steel work, or working in an auto factory, when that industry is no longer profitable or becomes obsolete, you're left with a group of workers who have spent too many years, are too old, or too specialized in a skill that really isn't applicable elsewhere, to move onto another area of work, and are thus left by the wayside.
This is something that arises in biology too. If a species becomes too specialized for survival in a certain niche environment, and either that environment disappears, or conditions change, the species is usually culled. We should not operate as brutally indifferent as nature though. :bored:
Do I have to bring up the fact that you live in a really nice house, presumably in a really nice neighborhood?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
No party is perfect of course but the Democratic party has racism in its very platform! Hello Affirmative Action??Quote:
Again, the party you support, and the holders of your ideology, contain racists, corruption, and examples of mismanagement too. These things are not solely a construct or result of Democrats or liberalism.
OH LOL, Hello anti-gay marriage (and in some cases anti-homosexuality laws, or anti-sodomy laws). :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
We can play this game all day. :bored:
Edit: I'm not trying to apologize for the actions of the Democratic party, just point out you keep ignoring when the party you vouch for does comparable things.
Lewk, Breitbart is a lying hobag. He got busted red-handed taking down that woman in Georgia. Liar. Busted. Red-handed.
Fox abandoned all pretense of impartiality long ago. Their commentary hosts are all far-right. Their token liberal guests are living straw men. They make up smearing news. Their hosts hit the road with the tea party, actually hosting rallies. They're not just skewed, their nakedly extremist.
CBN is fundamentalist.
Your quoting these three is the converse of some liberal quoting the DU. It is laughable. It is grotesque.
I can't imagine how that would be relevant to your claim that Michigan's economy tanked because all of its secondary schools are 'horrible.'Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Really? You can't think about why people without the skills to succeed in the modern economy would have trouble attracting companies to the state or get jobs with the ones unfortunate enough to already be located there?
So still no denial from Tear on the actual information. Nice. And DU is a forum not a news site. Are you going to ever provide a list of sources that are impartial unbiased and acceptable to you?
This has to do with racism how?Quote:
OH LOL, Hello anti-gay marriage (and in some cases anti-homosexuality laws, or anti-sodomy laws).
Discrimination is discrimination, Lewk.
That even includes religion, and that's a choice - unlike race, gender, sexual orientation, or age.
Although I could have sworn you said at some point that you thought of marriage as a religious institution, and not a civil one, and therefore objected to laws against gay marriage on that principle.
That's not what I was questioning the relevancy of. Nor do you have a basis to claim all mi secondary schools are bad. Detroit's got bad schools and that's part of it's problem, but not the cause.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
No dessert for you young man until you fix it!Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Come on, this thread has Lewk conflating Lincoln with Palin, my post makes boat-loads more sense in comparison!
So is promoting people who work harder. So is not hiring criminals... playing semantics here but my point about the Democratic party and liberals was racism.Quote:
Discrimination is discrimination, Lewk.
You are correct. Marriage should not be a recognized government institution. Being married or not being married should confer no penalties or benefits. I don't like the Big Brother party of the Republican party. Weather it is the bed room or the board room its not governments job to interfere. Just because I identify myself with Republicans don't mean I support every part of their position. When taken as a whole they are FAR better then Democrats.Quote:
Although I could have sworn you said at some point that you thought of marriage as a religious institution, and not a civil one, and therefore objected to laws against gay marriage on that principle.
:bored: When have I ever claimed that every single school in Michigan is bad? Seriously, wtf.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
When you said: "You have a horrible secondary education system" was there some other context you were speaking in, or were you following the line of discussion where you were tossing out simplistic, wide brush, politically inflammatory reasons why Michigan's economy is screwed up? Did you mean me personally? I have a horrible secondary school system? What? :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I refuse to read it. In fact, "refuse" is a good word to apply, isn't it?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Yeah, I guess I'm having trouble finding a site on the left that lies as nakedly as the ones you cite. Doubtlessly they are there, they just aren't mainstream.Quote:
And DU is a forum not a news site.
At this point I'm accepting those who don't shout their conflict of interest from the rooftops. Since you haven't ven met that standard, further discussion is pointless.Quote:
Are you going to ever provide a list of sources that are impartial unbiased and acceptable to you?
This has to do with racism how?[/QUOTE]
And how exactly does one interpret "you have a horrible secondary education system" to mean that every single school in the state is bad? :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
This is why precise statements are preferable when possible! Though you were answering a pretty open-ended question, soQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Or one can not be an idiot and interpret statements in a reasonable manner. When is the statement "schools in x are bad" ever interpreted to mean that every single school in x is bad? Use some common sense, people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
He didn't say you said that. You have set up and knocked down another straw man. Congrats. :bored:
"Nor do you have a basis to claim all mi secondary schools are bad" :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by ']['ear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Well, what makes your statement even more ignorant and irrelevant is that the state doesn't have a secondary school system. Each community runs its own school district. The state provides some funding for the schools but until recently it only got involved enough in the operations to make sure every student took a government class. There's standardized testing and math/reading requirements now - more or less since No Child Left Behind - and more stuff since Obama's recent Reach for the Sky (or whatever) grant contest,(in which MI didn't win any grants), but that's all pretty new stuff. Your statement really doesn't make any sense at all in light of reality.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
List your sources you find acceptable. I'm going to love showing the liberal bias they have. Go ahead. Any day now.Quote:
At this point I'm accepting those who don't shout their conflict of interest from the rooftops. Since you haven't ven met that standard, further discussion is pointless.
Actually, you were the one whose sources were challenged. I mean, it's fun to see you concerned about media integrity for the first time, but how about you stop trying to turn the table. Defend your sources. "No you" is not a suitable riposte.
Just for curiosity's sake, can you list examples of the liberal bias in the following:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
NBC News
National Public Radio
CNN
BBC
Wall Street Journal (as if ;) )
New York Times
Washington Post
Also, can you do an honest comparison of degree between these outlets and Fox News. You know, mildy biased vs. extreme. If you can compare how often the bias occurs, that would be helpful as well. As I understand it, its more or less continuous at Fox, but if you throw out an example for CNN that is fairly rare and then condemn the outlet as extremely biased, that would be very inaccurate. Thanks.
Can't believe you threw NPR and the NY Times in there. I don't think even they would deny that they have a left-wing bias (and BBC just admitted that it has a left-wing bias, and that's left-wing by British standards)...
Well, what's good for the goose is good for the Michigander.
It's possible that Michican is a really major outlier and the state Board of Education is or was practically nonexistent, but I doubt it. You're being disingenous. That Texas textbook commission doesn't make actual textbook decisions for the Texas school districts, it just devises guidelines, so by your logic it is pretty much meaningless right? And you were just blowing smoke in those threads about it?Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
Do you have any legitimate examples of left wing bias on NPR? TBH, I don't see it. When there's commentary, its very clearly identified who it is and what they represent and I've heard left wing and right wing commentary. I don't see a bias in actual news reporting either.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
I'm sure there are guidelines but that's not tantamount to a state-run school system. Every district is different, with different structures, local rules and local boards of education. You really think because there are state guidelines that means you can lump it all together as a State School System?Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
Again, you were fine doing so wrt Texas.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
#1. You should answer the question according to what you believe is reasonable rather than reference something I said in a different discussion and a different context.Quote:
Originally Posted by LittleFuzzy
#2. I don't fully understand the Texas reference. I'm not sure I remember what you're referencing. Please elaborate a little.
Ok. I flat out do not believe that the public education regulatory apparatus in Michigan is so massively decentralized that one cannot refer to education in the state in any generalized manner, as you have alleged. Either you're being duplicitous, or you are deceiving yourself to minimize cognitive dissonance. You have no issue with such references when they're divorced from your personal anecdotal experiences.Quote:
Originally Posted by EyeKhan
LOL! So by the very fact you disagree with a source the burden of proof is on me to defend a major national news source one that is viewed more often then its peers? Nice one.Quote:
Actually, you were the one whose sources were challenged. I mean, it's fun to see you concerned about media integrity for the first time, but how about you stop trying to turn the table. Defend your sources. "No you" is not a suitable riposte.
Regardless of what the source is I look at the data. Blind objection to information from a source is no different then blind acceptance from a source.
The question of the matter is do you believe liberals have made an effort to infiltrate tea party rallies and make them look bad. You of course don't even get to it since all you will do is say "0MG FOX NEWS B!ASED!!!@!!"
I'm too lazy to go over each source. Pick one, and if Tear agrees he believes the source is purely objective and unbiased and we can accept reporting from them... I'll show the bias.Quote:
Just for curiosity's sake, can you list examples of the liberal bias in the following:
I'm running out of patience with this, but the fallacy you're engaging in is one of expecting your opponents sources to have a crystal clean record when it comes to bias, while at the same time writing off some pretty egregious bias, lying and distortion of facts, for your own sources and then lambasting anyone who doesn't accept them as the word of truth itself.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
Lewk, there's not even a pretense or veneer of impartiality with the sources you list. Fox is sponsoring tea bagger rallies, Breitbart is faking video clips as character assassinatins, and the third is an official fundie site. When's the last time that one of the sites Chaloobi mentioned actually helped create political movement?
BTW, I never denied that somebody tried to infiltrate the teabaggers. That's hardly news. Dems and Reps were infiltrating each other as far back as the early 80s, when I was high school, and I'm sure they've been doing it forever in every party in every country. Figures that the tea baggers' advocates (the sources you cite) would be whining about it, though. The fact that Fox whimpers about such an activity directed at tea baggers but doesn't mention the long, storied history of the activity is, well, classic Fox. Institutionalized lying.
Actually no. I don't expect any source to be unbiased. This is why people need to look at the information itself. The point I'm making is that Tear feels free to attack my source but doesn't offer something in place.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
Yes, I see your laziness not only in your arguments but in the core of your thinking and your concepts of right and wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lewkowski
You choose one or two to attack. But don't put a lot of out of context BS or lies out there. Try to take the exercise seriously.
Defend Breitbart, Lewk. How's about we start there, and you explain to me why anybody should ever take that asshole's word for anything. He's a lying sack of shit.