Obama's speech on education banned from schools

[tchitt]

If I had said "decidedly cyclist groups obviously don't allow joggers", would you argue that perhaps joggers choose not to join said groups because they feel as though they'd be discriminated against? Would you accuse me of assuming that cyclists hate joggers? Or would you be able to take what I said for what it means? As for your question in regard to Bush; no, I really don't believe what I never claimed to, I meant what I said.

That said, I am curious to know how you derived this:

So you're comparing cyclists and joggers to caucasians and african-americans? A jogger wouldn't join a cyclist group because he's not a cyclist... this doesn't translate to race in any way whatsoever. A black man is a white man with darker skin, and vice versa. So what exactly DO you mean?

And as for how I came up with the idea that legislating segregation perpetuated a stigma? Several generations growing up and seeing "WHITES ONLY" signs everywhere is going to send a message. A message that says we're different and not fit to coexist for whatever reason.

 

[turbo]

Are you joking? If so, it's a bad one.

Any evidence that a "high proportion of white students in the deep south attend "Christian" Academies that are racially segregated? Any evidence of a single such school?

Any evidence that "No blacks are allowed in conservative white churches"?

And you accuse Bush of perpetuating segregation? A majority of congress voted to perpetuate segregation, too?

These claims aren't just wild, unsubstantiated and hateful, there's absolutely no way you could believe them yourself.

Apparently you never heard of segregation academies. Never heard of how regions of the south decimated their public school systems and moved to voucher systems so parents could send their kids to private all-white schools that were supposed to be immune to the dictates of Brown. When the legality of this process was challenged, they changed tack.

Apparently, decades of these private academies morphing into "church schools" to provide protection for segregation under "right of free association" for religious groups is not on your radar, either. As for "hateful", I assure you that I was shocked and embarrassed to find this crap going on in modern times. If you want to insult me for telling the truth, go for it. Segregation is alive and well in lots of the country, and it's counter-productive to ignore it or gloss it over.

Google on "segregation academy" and start following links. This is not fiction. Next time some neo-con starts braying about how "school vouchers" will help inner-city black children, remember the GOP's Southern strategy. Take off the blinders.

As I have said over and over again, I was a Republican until the party left me to suck up to the neo-cons and the Christian right-wing. I have to hold my nose every time I vote because this two-party system is corrupt and real conservatism has been abandoned. Hopefully, death is final, else Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave.

 

[kyleb]

Note there was no 'in white churches', or 'in Alabama', or 'where I visited once but not where I live' modifying that statement.

Well your first proposed qualifier isn't even logical, as white couches aren't rightly considered segregated, but rather exclusivist, on Sunday or otherwise. As for he other two qualifiers you propose, both limit the scope of the comment, which isn't rightly necessary unless wanting to excuse segregation elsewhere.

So you're comparing cyclists and joggers to caucasians and african-americans?

No, I simply replased the subjects of my comment to provide some I'd hoped would leave you less ideologicly opposed to comprhending my statement.

A jogger wouldn't join a cyclist group because he's not a cyclist...

There are many possible reasons a jogger might want to join a cyclist group, them owning a track which the jogger wants access to being one simple example.

And as for how I came up with the idea that legislating segregation perpetuated a stigma? Several generations growing up and seeing "WHITES ONLY" signs everywhere is going to send a message. A message that says we're different and not fit to coexist for whatever reason.

I wasn't taking issue with a claim that legislating segregation send the message that we're not fit to coexist. Rather, I was taking issue with your "in the first place" claim suggesting that government intervention was an initial cause.

 

[Jasongreat]

Again, assuming there still are decidedly white schools, the voucher program Bush supported would serve to perpetuate them.

Wouldnt black students be able to get the vouchers also to help them afford to go to the private school of their choice? I think that would be a wonderful thing, since if the schools did allow them(like I think they would/should) everyone wins. If the schools chose not to allow them to attend, you would have a solid claim of racism, which would surely capture the publics eye(since you would have solid proof instead of speculation) and it would be stamped out quickly(because no matter what we've been told a super majority of americans are not racists).

 

[noblegas]

Apparently you never heard of segregation academies. Never heard of how regions of the south decimated their public school systems and moved to voucher systems so parents could send their kids to private all-white schools that were supposed to be immune to the dictates of Brown. When the legality of this process was challenged, they changed tack.

Apparently, decades of these private academies morphing into "church schools" to provide protection for segregation under "right of free association" for religious groups is not on your radar, either. As for "hateful", I assure you that I was shocked and embarrassed to find this crap going on in modern times. If you want to insult me for telling the truth, go for it. Segregation is alive and well in lots of the country, and it's counter-productive to ignore it or gloss it over.

Google on "segregation academy" and start following links. This is not fiction. Next time some neo-con starts braying about how "school vouchers" will help inner-city black children, remember the GOP's Southern strategy. Take off the blinders.

As I have said over and over again, I was a Republican until the party left me to suck up to the neo-cons and the Christian right-wing. I have to hold my nose every time I vote because this two-party system is corrupt and real conservatism has been abandoned. Hopefully, death is final, else Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave.

Yes, enforced racial segregation decimated the public schools system because funds to the two racially segregated schools were unequal. Voluntary segregation(intentional or not) will not necessarily destroyed the quality of the public school. As I stated in my previous post, there are plenty of schools where the student body is mostly non-white that perform exceptionally well. You keep touting that the republicans want racism but nobody has mentioned race, except you ; Its not just the children of 'christian right wing " parents who want vouchers for their kids, many parents of minority children favored vouchers , as seen here at this rally(http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2009/07/school_voucher_advocates_rally.html); I would not understand why you opposed vouchers; The government gives you money to choose any school you want your child too attend whether the school you want your child to go to is private or public. Public schools in most states are monopolies , and therefore the quality of education you receive, especially if you reside in a low-income area is abysmal, because since there is virtually no other competitions, public schools don't have to worry about improving its quality since all customers or most customers are going to one school; Why maintain a failing school?

 

[mheslep]

Well your first proposed qualifier isn't even logical, as white couches aren't rightly considered segregated, but rather exclusivist, on Sunday or otherwise. As for he other two qualifiers you propose, both limit the scope of the comment, which isn't rightly necessary unless wanting to excuse segregation elsewhere.

Kyleb - don't put words in my mouth. I do not propose any of those qualifiers, I note specifically that they are not there in the President's statement. The President was right. The implication by others above going on and on about the South and whites was that one or more of those qualifiers should be there, and they're wrong.

 

[kyleb]

Wouldnt black students be able to get the vouchers also to help them afford to go to the private school of their choice?

Not decidedly white ones. Please respect the context of my statements. I am not even claiming there still are any decidedly white schools, but rather simply answering a question based on the hypothetical that there could be.

...(because no matter what we've been told a super majority of americans are not racists).

Do you some statistics to back that claim up? I consider all bigotry intellectually dishonest, and I know plenty of others agree. However, I also now many who argue "everyone is at least a little racist", and don't rightly have enough information to determine where the majority is. Regardless, I am not one to believe what I've been told, and I'd appreciate it if you could avoid assuming otherwise.

 

[kyleb]

Kyleb - don't put words in my mouth. I do not propose any of those qualifiers, I note specifically that they are not there in the President's statement. The President was right. The implication by others above going on and on about the South and whites was that one or more of those qualifiers should be there, and they're wrong.

You presented the qualifies within your comment, and without anything to identify whether you were doing so in support or critique of the statement you quoted. My response did not put words in your mouth, but only responded to your statement as you presented it. That said, I am glad to see we agree.

 

[WhoWee]

My 9th grader sat through the speech today (they started school on Wednesday). She said he was boring, but it got them out of math class.

 

[Hurkyl]

I was waiting for a good opportunity to mention it, but I hadn't written anything else lately so I'll point it out now.



People have been deriding the criticism for all sorts of reasons -- but do note that all this controversy had positive effects:
. The transcript was made available beforehand
. Things that some people really did find objectionable were removed

 

[Al68]

Apparently you never heard of segregation academies. Never heard of how regions of the south decimated their public school systems and moved to voucher systems so parents could send their kids to private all-white schools that were supposed to be immune to the dictates of Brown. When the legality of this process was challenged, they changed tack.

Wild, hateful speculation about the motives of others isn't evidence.

Apparently, decades of these private academies morphing into "church schools" to provide protection for segregation under "right of free association" for religious groups is not on your radar, either. As for "hateful", I assure you that I was shocked and embarrassed to find this crap going on in modern times. If you want to insult me for telling the truth, go for it. Segregation is alive and well in lots of the country, and it's counter-productive to ignore it or gloss it over.

It's counter-productive to accuse people of racism based on either wild speculation, or faulty mind-reading skills.

Google on "segregation academy" and start following links. This is not fiction. Next time some neo-con starts braying about how "school vouchers" will help inner-city black children, remember the GOP's Southern strategy. Take off the blinders.

I am fully aware of Democrats' strategy to publicly speculate on the motives of anyone who dares disagree with their agenda. These speculations (lies) are not evidence.

As I have said over and over again, I was a Republican until the party left me to suck up to the neo-cons and the Christian right-wing. I have to hold my nose every time I vote because this two-party system is corrupt and real conservatism has been abandoned. Hopefully, death is final, else Barry Goldwater is spinning in his grave.

Yes, you keep saying, yet your political beliefs shown on this forum are very, very unlike Goldwater's to say the least. Pretty much the opposite on most issues. Goldwater was more libertarian than any politician in Washington today. No modern Republican is as different from you on economic issues as he was.

I'll take this whole post as a no, that you have no evidence that blacks aren't allowed in white churches. "Conservative white churches" have at least one thing in common with black churches: They don't turn anyone away for any reason. Period. No one is told they're not welcome in any church I ever heard of, ever. All that is ever expected is that they are not disruptive.

And you offered no evidence of even a single church in which blacks are not allowed, much less that it's true in general. And yes, it is wrong, absurd, and hateful to make such a claim.

 

[Al68]

While I still can't substantiate his claim, if there still are decidedly white churches, they obviously don't allow blacks.

Obviously? They allow anyone and everyone, period.

Just like "decidedly black churches" allow anyone and everyone, period.

No one is ever turned away from any church I ever heard of, and I'm still waiting for any evidence to the contrary

Again, assuming there still are decidedly white schools, the voucher program Bush supported would serve to perpetuate them.

The voucher system simply allowed individuals to choose a school instead of government. None of the schools were "segregated". Sure, in many areas, black people choose common neighborhoods, schools, and churches. That's not what the word "segregation" means.

 

[Al68]

I am not sure if I would be able to find information on segregation of schools in the south during the 90s I can show you evidence that segregation (or attempts at it) may exist even today.
http://www.cnn.com/2009/US/07/09/philly.pool/index.html
http://www.thenotebook.org/taxonomy/term/148Segregation in schools in the 90s
http://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2001/08/08/43deseg.h20.htmlhttp://www.civilrights.uga.edu/bibliographies/augusta/busing.htm

I keep finding references to all white schools but can't find anything actually saying there were in fact all white schools. I'm sure that some could have slipped by the law. This article in particular about AL (where Turbo says this happened) seems rather telling.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/nov/30/usa.schoolsworldwide

It seems you misinterpreted my post. Turbo didn't just claim that there were all white schools, the claim was that blacks weren't allowed in "conservative white churches", which is preposterous.

They simply do not ever turn anyone away. Everyone is welcome.

Also, the word "segregation" simply doesn't mean that a church (or school) is all white or all black due to the individual choices of people. It means that people are are disallowed because of skin color. The difference is obvious.

 

[sylas]

People have been deriding the criticism for all sorts of reasons -- but do note that all this controversy had positive effects:
. The transcript was made available beforehand
. Things that some people really did find objectionable were removed

With respect, I disagree. I am not aware of any change to the speech; and the only change to the lesson plans was clearly detrimental.

There was never any good reason to object to the idea of students writing to the president, or helping the president. Bush made this suggestion in his speech in 1991, and it is a good suggestion. The objections made to this activity were ludicrous, and the change was very much for the worse.

Cheers -- sylas

 

[Hurkyl]

With respect, I disagree. I am not aware of any change to the speech;

I was sure someone claimed it earlier.

and the only change to the lesson plans was clearly detrimental.

Okay fine -- mixed results. Some people found it objectionable and got it changed. I suppose it was silly of me to think that people wouldn't object to the new version.

 

[Al68]

My 9th grader sat through the speech today (they started school on Wednesday). She said he was boring, but it got them out of math class.

Your 9th grader's comment is the smartest one I've heard yet.

 

[turbo]

Get it together, people! Obama's speech did NOT change. It was the same speech that he had planned to deliver. The spin being put on this by the right-wing "entertainers" like Limbaugh is sickening, and no reasonably intelligent American ought to spend more time than is necessary to debunk it. Unfortunately, there are lots of mentally deficient people who will swallow the neo-con line with no consideration for the effects of neo-con policies on their own families. Sad.

 

[sylas]

I was sure someone claimed it earlier.

Yes; people have made all kinds of claims. It gets hard to sort it out, but in brief I sympathize with turbo-1's outburst above. Sadly, one has to check claims that are made; many are entirely without merit.

Okay fine -- mixed results. Some people found it objectionable and got it changed. I suppose it was silly of me to think that people wouldn't object to the new version.

It's quite true that in a highly polarized environment you can be sure there'll be someone to object to anything.

But I'm not really objecting to the new version, so much as regretting the absurd reactions that lead to modifications of what should have been unexceptional. The original was a positive idea and there's no rational reason it couldn't have wide bipartisan support.

I do think the original materials were more likely to inspire students and have a useful impact. But that's just my view and not really that important. I'm not so much concerned about which was better so much as expressing my contempt at the nonsense that was used to denigrate the original lesson plan.

I think there is nothing wrong with suggesting students can help the president. Bush said the same thing explicitly in his speech, and it's a good thing for students to aspire to. To remove it from the lesson plan is not at all in line with the best traditions of American democracy and civic pride. There's no implication you have to agree with everything or vote for the guy next time round, but given that he is the elected national leader, helping him in his task is a worthy aim for all citizens. I have been impressed, in fact, with how the various presidents themselves know this; with how Bush handed over the Obama, for example; or Gore in conceding to Bush. Newt Gingrich has also said some very sensible things on this whole brouhaha. (See LA Time story, there are lots more.)

Cheers -- sykas

 

[Hurkyl]

I'm not so much concerned about which was better so much as expressing my contempt at the nonsense that was used to denigrate the original lesson plan.

Was it blown out of proportion? Maybe -- I haven't followed things enough to know for sure either way.

But I'm not concerned about the claims that criticisms were blown out of proportion -- the bit I'm concerned about are the claims (implicit or otherwise) that criticism shouldn't have existed at all.

 

[russ_watters]

Then, as now, a very high proportion of white students in the deep south attend "Christian" Academies that are racially segregated. No blacks are allowed in conservative white churches and only church members can send their kids to the "Christian" Academies associated with those churches. Bush wanted to not only perpetuate the segregation, but to use taxpayer money to pay for it. Great strategy if you want the Southern right-wing vote, but not so good for the taxpayers.

Turbo-1, this is a serious charge that requires explicit substantiation. If you have none, then it is just a conspiracy theory. Substantiate it with clear evidence or retract it.

 

[Evo]

Locked.