GWB has a mental defect where he is pathologically unable to change course and recognise he is a pawn sometimes. Oliver layed it out pretty well, a major part of this is about decimating public schools, moving the money to for-profit, apparently extremist white Christian ones. But he will repeat the same straw man, over and over as he needs a psychiatrist. Jem, quite similar.
Are you in favor of medicating kids until they are effectively zombies -- and even then they act out constantly and out of control when their medicine is off. There are a host of issues facing public schools today. Go ask teachers about the number of times they have been threatened by middle and high school students.
Yep and if I missed the part where they discussed the master plan by the architects of the fake CRT stuff, I'm sorry. Did I miss that? Its just I saw it yesterday and figured I'd post the video but then thought, you know what? GWB will mentally blank out that part and find ways to write demean and belittle another half dozen times. Oh and yes, I read this "and is merely being used to push school choice and "white-wash" K-12 education."
Actually much of what Oliver states very much aligns with the feedback I have provided about CRT -- including the examples of the abuse of CRT-based lesson plans in the classroom being used to belittle & demean children outlined at the 9:58 and 27 minutes marks.
You keep lying to yourself instead of doing the respectable thing and admitting you got bamboozled into this latest "CRT in our school" scaremongering narrative. Oliver basically covered all my bullet points, readers can click through the posts and see for themselves.
If i had a dollar everytime you repeated the Fox news.mantra of belittle and demean i would have retired already....
I would urge everyone to watch Oliver's video. He covers nearly everything I have mentioned regarding CRT in K-12 schools in the U.S. Readers can feel free to review my posts and see for themselves.
The teacher's sharia utopia GWB prayed for: Oklahoma Senator Rob Standridge has proposed the Students’ Religious Belief Protection Act, which includes an option to sue teachers $10,000 for contradicting a student’s religious beliefs. In fact, the bill forbids school districts to employ a person “that promotes positions in the classroom or any function of the public school that is in opposition to closely held religious beliefs of students.” The bill also allows parents to bring an action against the school or individual, in which case they can seek the following remedies. 1) They can ask for an injunction to require the school and teacher be “enjoined from the conduct” that promotes positions “in opposition to the closely held religious beliefs of the student.” 2) If the school does not immediately comply, the parents or guardians may refile against any and all employees of the district “directly or indirectly” promoting those positions. Those individuals can be held liable for a minimum of $10,000 in damages (per incident, per individual). They must pay that money out of their own pocket; if they receive any “assistance from individuals or groups,” they must be fired, and they cannot be re-employed within the state for five years. 3) If the school does not immediately comply with either 1 or 2, they may be sued again, and all directly or indirectly involved individuals may be fired and permanently barred from working in any public school in the state. The bill does not specify which particular “deeply help religious beliefs” are covered, meaning that such a law would provide rich ground for groups like the Church of the Flying Spagetti Monster and the Satanic Temple, which have often challenged religious laws in this country. But such a law would have a supremely chilling effect on every class from history to science to health. The bill is designed to intimidate, and the law would result in administrators and teachers avoiding anything that could possibly cost them $10,000 or their job (average teacher pay in Oklahoma is $42,000). Of course, the bill seems unlikely to become a law. It has been referred to the Senate Education Committee and has yet to pick up any co-sponsors. Nor does it seem likely to escape a court challenge. But it is a sign of just how far some legislators feel empowered to go in attempts to control what teachers may or may not say in a classroom.