Liberal Hypocrisy and local politics

a reply to: Edumakated

What is sad is it is always played to the racism/discrimination issue. It's not.

It's an issue of people not wanting 'thug mentality' around their kids. It's not a school issue, it's a parenting issue. When parents allow (and sometimes even encourage because it's cool?) their kids to be little hell-raisers, those kids will exhibit that behavior no matter where they are.

It's a parenting issue, NOT a school issue.

Personally I would love to see all states go to an ESA policy allowing the parents to choose between public and private schools. Obviously the ESA wouldn't cover the full cost of private school, but it would cover a large portion of it, so parents could decide where they want the tax money allocated to their child's education to go.

So how will the 25% that get moved be decided?
Is it by lottery, zone of residence, academic achievement or is it purely there’s not enough diversity?
I’m all for putting kids with their intellectual peers as in a normal bell curve class the kids on either extreme always suffer.
If this is about skin colour or ethnicity then it’s racism pure and simple.

Whatever the case this reeks of stupidity

a reply to: Edumakated

Of course, what makes me chuckle is that 95% of the people in that room probably are raging liberals.

Probably?

Your entire thread is based on an assumption?

a reply to: IkNOwSTuff

One source I saw on this said that they were moving lower achieving students. I don't know if that means all the students in the other district are lower achieving or if that means they aren't even moving the best kids out of that other district figuring that exposing kids who were academically behind to academic excellence in a high performing district will bring them up mysteriously.

If it's the latter case, this is going to be doomed from the start in all likelihood. The kids who are behind are going to be really frustrated and many will almost certainly have reasons why they're underperforming that have little to do with actual intellectual ability. So without sorting out their issues, this isn't going to really go anywhere.

originally posted by: IkNOwSTuff
If this is about skin colour or ethnicity then it’s racism pure and simple.

Whatever the case this reeks of stupidity

Whenever you see the word diversify, it's clearly about color and ethnicity. And yes it is racism, just not the kind people like to acknowledge, therefore it's 'diversity'.

a reply to: introvert

It's New York.

So, affirmative action applied to public school?

Or have I missed something?

a reply to: Edumakated

Oh, this one is going to be fun!!!!

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

It's New York.

It's still an assumption.

a reply to: ketsuko

If it's the latter case, this is going to be doomed from the start in all likelihood. The kids who are behind are going to be really frustrated and many will almost certainly have reasons why they're underperforming that have little to do with actual intellectual ability. So without sorting out their issues, this isn't going to really go anywhere.

Right. That's why they would need remedial classes, although that would most certainly appear racist!

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Edumakated

Of course, what makes me chuckle is that 95% of the people in that room probably are raging liberals.

Probably?

Your entire thread is based on an assumption?

And privilege....

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Edumakated

Of course, what makes me chuckle is that 95% of the people in that room probably are raging liberals.

Probably?

Your entire thread is based on an assumption?

And your jab at one line providing absolutely nothing to the topic is supposed to be relevant?

OP is probably over-assuming, but there still is a topic/issue to discuss. Would you like to make a contribution for a change instead of adding one-liners attacking OP's?

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: Edumakated

Of course, what makes me chuckle is that 95% of the people in that room probably are raging liberals.

Probably?

Your entire thread is based on an assumption?

Um...... no. Take a look at the Map. Its the area west of Central Park. Solidly Blue for Democrats. High 80%'s if not some in the 90% range.

Link to voting map

a reply to: introvert



2016 Election Results NYC neighborhoods

Hmmm, Ok, maybe a bit of an exaggeration. The Upper West Side only went about 89% Clinton. /rolleyes

But I'll bet it was a pretty large majority of Clinton/liberal voters in there.

Locally, it's even more blue. One of these Democrat councilmen won re-election with 95% of the vote, so maybe 95% isn't that far wrong after all.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: ketsuko

If it's the latter case, this is going to be doomed from the start in all likelihood. The kids who are behind are going to be really frustrated and many will almost certainly have reasons why they're underperforming that have little to do with actual intellectual ability. So without sorting out their issues, this isn't going to really go anywhere.

Right. That's why they would need remedial classes, although that would most certainly appear racist!

Our Charter Schools here that end up getting a lot of Detroit School District Kids really underperform. They say it's because those kids are in 6th and 7th grade but test out in Reading and Math at 3rd and 4th grade levels. Those kids have it hard. Even the younger kids scores are below average. Some school districts are just abysmal. Nobody has been able to fix education in Lower income areas.

Bringing them elsewhere wont help them much and will hold any gifted kids back as they will not get any extra attention. Those charter schools I speak of don't really challenge high performing students, they are too busy trying to get the bottom 40% just up to average students.

a reply to: Sookiechacha

So what if the remedial classes don't currently exist? I'm not saying every student there is up to grade level, but what if the levels of students underperforming isn't high enough to warrant full remedial classes?

Now you are talking about creating a completely different program for these students and hiring new faculty. Oh, and when I mention issues, I'm not just talking about fixing academic underperformance. I am talking about life issues that prevent them from performing up to snuff -- undiagnosed learning disabilities, mental issues, home issues, etc. -- things that most kids in affluent life situations would most likely have had tackled young and been receiving treatment for all along that you are now looking at having to diagnose and deal with in older children/adolescents after they're good and baked in.

That's a lot of resources.

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: introvert

2016 Election Results NYC neighborhoods

Hmmm, Ok, maybe a bit of an exaggeration. The Upper West Side only went about 89% Clinton. /rolleyes

But I'll bet it was a pretty large majority of Clinton/liberal voters in there.

Locally, it's even more blue. One of these Democrat councilmen won re-election with 95% of the vote, so maybe 95% isn't that far wrong after all.

*****Introvert Slowly backs away from this thread******

a reply to: Edumakated

Do you not realize that your "argument" for "liberal hypocrisy" is basically a rehashed segregationist talking point? I mean, it's probably just coincidence because this pattern for "exposing liberal hypocrisy" appears in just about every political issue ever.

After all, the "limousine liberals," the "liberal elites," the "coastal elites," "the cosmopolitans," (the galdarned city folk!) etc are all really just memes intended to make conservatives feel like their hatred of egalitarianism and diminished capacity for empathy are how everyone *really* feels deep down inside but only conservatives are honest about it.

You see it all the time:

"If you want refugees, you should be willing to house them in your home!!!"

"If Obama's kids have a Secret Service detail, teachers should be armed!!!"

"If you don't want a wall, then you shouldn't have a fence!!!"

"If you don't (agree with whatever about immigration/the borer) you should leave the door to your house wide open!!!"

It can just go on and on. You don't want a homeless man living in your spare bedroom? You don't REALLY care about the homeless! You're not in Chicago personally trying to lower the murder rate? YOU DON'T CARE ABOUT DEAD BLACK MEN!

As for your specific examples, you have no real idea how "liberal" any of those people are and neither do I. A lot of people who espouse "conservative views" should be grateful that liberal progressive positions have won the day at various junctions in history. Like basically anyone who isn't a straight white male born into a middle-class (or wealthier) family like me. Also, anyone who views porn. Lol.

Conservatism is a strange thing to me. It's all about being pulled into the past. Regression, going backwards, stagnating, futile meltdown in the face of change. You know what happens when conservatism takes over complete control of society? You get # like the Middle Ages. A millennium of perpetuating the status quo. Or worse, look at the most conservative modern nations in the world — theocracies. For all the culture war bull# from right-wingers, it doesn't get much more "conservative" in the modern world than a Muslim theocracy.

In fact, I'm fairly certain if a powerful faction of conservatives ever got their fundie dream of Christian theocracy, it would be every bit as bad and in much the same ways because at their root, all of the Abrahamic religions have much the same proscriptions and dictates.

So be thankful that the "liberal hypocrites" are around to keep you guys from Talibanning the # out of us all.

a reply to: theantediluvian

Somebody didn't read to the end of the thread before posting.