Who won the Civil War?

Who won the Civil War? Or why school administrators and teachers should be taken out and shot
You know the drill, you've seen these before but it is still scary.
And these kids adults are college students! And voters!
What an indictment of our educational system and so-called higher education!
Why people should have to pass a civics test in order to vote. And a history test. And a economics test. And...
Primary school, high school, college -- why are we paying for this. What are we paying for.
Do parents even talk to their kids at home anymore? Have a family discussion, people.
Who won the Civil War? ... and this is in TEXAS!

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 "raykeller@right_wing_whiners wrote:

An error occurred while retrieving your video or the video does not exist Try refreshing the page or click here to visit the main page
KopyPasta does it again.

On Wed, 26 Aug 2015 13:39:45 -0700, "raykeller"
wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Well, yes, it is Texas. A state with a well established history of being against education. You get what you pay for.
https://storify.com/EdTechSandyK/texas-education-budget-cuts
Keeping kids stupid is the primary goal of conservatives.

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 07:47:01 -0600, deep wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
It's not just Texas. You'd probably get similar results (in fact, this interview shtick has been pulled many times, and the results tend to be similar) almost anywhere in the country.
Why? We've so denigrated history, geography and the rest of the liberal arts -- thank you STEM and "Common Core" -- that kids don't even pay attention to them anymore.
Our college programs have become so career-oriented that calling what they do "education" is a joke. It's high-priced vocational training, particularly in the technical fields. Vocational training is a great thing. But the unfortunate result of over emphasizing it is that it squeezes out a genuine, liberal-arts education.
It's been going on for decades and it keeps getting worse. I was part of the generation who were taught in an environment that had reacted to Sputnik. Suddenly, by 1960 or 1962, math and science were everything.
I didn't realize that I had little real education until I was halfway through college, taking a course taught by George Will, and felt uncomfortable about it because I felt like I'd been dropped into the middle of a conversation. It was a political history course, and I had no concept of where all those conflicting ideas came from. As a result, I couldn't really evaluate any of them.
"I think I need to go back and study the classics," I said to Will. "Which ones?" he asked. I didn't even know which ones. I walked out of that meeting completely shattered.
That was the life-changing moment in which I dropped out of engineering and started studying the liberal arts. I went back and studied the classics, after finding out what they were.

Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Really? It's GOPers who are against education funding.
  Quoted Text Here  
Non STEM fields are still there. Blame Eisenhower though for the shift in emphasis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Education_Act
  Quoted Text Here  
You can always get a degree in something whose employment potential is low. It's choice. Goals are different. George Will
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Will#Education_and_early_career
He subsequently studied Philosophy, Politics, and Economics at Magdalen College, Oxford, (BA, MA), and received MA and PhD degrees in politics from Princeton University. His 1968 PhD dissertation was entitled Beyond the Reach of Majorities: Closed Questions in the Open Society.
Kinda non STEM...
  Quoted Text Here  
Eisenhower.
  Quoted Text Here  
His answer was correct. Consider what he has degrees in...
  Quoted Text Here  

  Quoted Text Here  
It's not a matter of how much money was spent on their education. It's amatter of what they learned.
  Quoted Text Here  
I'm aware of the history of it.
  Quoted Text Here  
And you can wind up a well-trained ignoramus with great employment prospects. And then, when you're asked who won the Civil War, or whether the Constitution allows states to tax people to vote, you can say that you don't know. Then you giggle.
  Quoted Text Here  
Right. He was a brilliant guy, pretty much in demand. He was a great lecturer, by the way, but a lousy academic advisor. However, he did hel me a lot -- mostly by turning his back on me. <g>
But some people have no trouble finding employment, and others can't get a job to save their lives, regardless of what they studied.
  Quoted Text Here  
It was the whole country. Are you old enough to remember? When Sputnik went up, the whole country went nuts.
  Quoted Text Here  
His answer was a question -- a non-answer.

This is fraud. Texas the Republic supported Education. It was part of the Constitution. When the US needed us to join the other states - yes they asked us... The State Constitution has education at all levels. They are supported by the local population and the state on some items. Higher level - TAMU and UT are funded by the constitution and Land Grants. The west Texas oil provided a high quality and volume of money.
Local school districts just go out and tell the tax assessor to pay them what they want. No vote. No begging or telling the truth. Just bill.
The local school district pays cash for every building and the fittings. Start school the next year in that new building.
Those are the facts. The amount coming out of the state is for salary and state programs. The AG programs are paid for by the AG university. The Forestry department is part of the AG university - TAMU. I can take tree/bush/grass/weed plant material and dirt material to the local Forestry / AG unit in the county - two levels - and they will help identify and determine what kind of chemical / natural / additive to grow what you want to grow. Really a great help. They identify odd sightings of plants and animals. They run the training for master gardeners. And some of them fight fires.
If you don't live here you just don't know. Lowering funding from one level to another might simply be not buying six new books in classrooms.
Books come in waves. Ramp up and ramp down. Funding for extraordinary issues. e.g. Tornado wipes a town out and there isn't a tax base to build a school. State steps up and funds it. But that is now and then.
One has to look at the specific bill that didn't fund to the previous level which isn't guaranteed for ever.
Would you take the insurance company of your house or car to increase their rates at any rate they want and never reduce ? Just higher and Higher ???
So think before you pop off on some lib newspaper crying about something.
Martin
On 8/31/2015 11:11 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  

No one won the American Civil War. It's not even over yet. Just a long and rather uneasy prolonged truce / cease-fire

Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
GOPers still think we can compete in world markets if kids are taught with chalk and little boards...
  Quoted Text Here  
Good.
  Quoted Text Here  
And yet he replied correctly to you.
  Quoted Text Here  
It was the whole country and it paid off.
  Quoted Text Here  
Apparently his answer was over your head.

  Quoted Text Here  
His non-answer reflected the fact that he had no time for anyone with an ordinary public school education. That was George. It still is.

On 9/7/2015 8:24 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Poor George is also the only one our age who went through the 60's without having any fun. It shows.
David

Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
He wanted you to think harder about what "classics" meant.

On Thu, 27 Aug 2015 10:19:07 -0400, Ed Huntress wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
I agree and bemoan the fall of the "liberal education" that paleo-conservatives have always supported.
Yet the libs tend to support common core and the Neocons, who deep says want to keep kids ignorant, tend to oppose it. Curious reversal of positions, no ?
  Quoted Text Here  
I applaud you.

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 12:07:09 -0700, Winston_Smith
  Quoted Text Here  
You don't like common core? Texas opposed it. I've never heard anything negative about it except fundies crying about how it's more state intrusion in parent's right to deprive their children of an education. Glancing down the list it's pretty obvious the blue states are adopting it, and the red states are either rejecting it or watering it down as much as possible.
  Quoted Text Here  

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 13:32:36 -0600, deep wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
There is the political issue of Federal intrusion and there is also the issue of what's the total curriculum taught in schools.
I'm old school (paleo-conservative). I want solid science but I want all the liberal arts too. Put in a strong civics content while you are at it. That's what we had, and probably every kid in the country back when dinosaurs roamed the earth and America was kicking technical and intellectual ass around the world.
We had a heavy selection of after school activities too that ranged the gamut. Today there is mostly nothing and if there is, the kids parents have to cough up a step price for the kid to participate. It was just part of "school" in my world. What the h*** are they doing with the ever increasing budgets?

On 09/05/2015 07:34 PM, Winston_Smith wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Checked the administrators' salaries lately? There's not much left to trickle down to buy new baseball bats.

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 22:17:38 -0600, rbowman wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Yeah, I was just doing a mental check list of my high school, who stood in class rooms and taught and how many drones there were.
With 1,000 kids in four grades, we had the principle, two office workers, a nurse, the librarian, and one custodial. That janitor also drove a bus (and was my scout master). That's it - six non-teachers. Plus a number of ladies that made hot lunches, from scratch, using real food.
The rest of the staff taught. Today you have specialists writing grant proposals, reports proving the school complied with umteen rules, etc. I doubt half the total staff man-hours are spent in front of a class teaching.

Winston_Smith wrote:
  Quoted Text Here  
Try teaching all of America's kids the old way and see how well we compete in a global economy...

  Quoted Text Here  
A tiny minority. Very, very tiny.
  Quoted Text Here  
That's tired old liberal mantra. First tell me what "day" means. I can give you quite a few conflicting versions right out of the Bible.
I notice the sequence of creation in Genesis and the sequence of cosmology and evolution are the same. In the time frame of human history, archeology and the Bible don't find much to differ over either. I can cite as many false starts in archeology as you can cite in conflicts in the Bible.
So where is this big religion vs. science disagreement? It comes down to quibbling what "day" means in an ambigous source.
Like I said, no real issue, just liberal BS to cloud the issue. Denigrate your opponent with a quick shot and shuffle on to something else real fast.

On Sat, 05 Sep 2015 18:44:42 -0700, Winston_Smith
  Quoted Text Here  
Oh, ok, so the Bible contradicts itself. That helps your argument.
  Quoted Text Here  
Not at all. For one thing in creation you claim dry land and plants precedes the sun, moon, and stars which is obviously quite impossible.
  Quoted Text Here  
Nonsense. The Bible fantasy isn't at all like real life.
  Quoted Text Here  
Well it is your fundie friends screwing up the works by insisting on a literal interpretation of a day among other things. We all know it's hundreds of millions of years, but the fundies just have to insist on literal interpretations when clearly that is not what anybody ever meant. Fundies would assimilate into modern society better if they could grasp the symbolism.
  Quoted Text Here  
The bullshit is not coming from the left. Look the other way.
  Quoted Text Here