Betsy DeVos likely to get education post despite all-night Democratic protest
101 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Limed00d;51789307]The way this train goes, not for long.
Yikes.[/QUOTE]
So far from being true. The US will not collapse because of shitty appointments. The world is not ending. I don't blame you though. I'm sure your only exposure to the state of the US is on an video game forum.
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;51789319]since burden of proof is on the guy supporting the terrible pick.[/QUOTE]
I've never heard that standard ever before. Burden of proof is always on the accuser. Technically, since you're accusing her of being a bad pick, the burden of proof is on you, not him.
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789174]Still less shit than India.
[editline]7th February 2017[/editline]
Hate yourself. Do something about it if it bothers you so much.[/QUOTE]
Sometimes of us have been protesting. The problem is that the government has become deaf dumb and blind
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789422]So far from being true. The US will not collapse because of shitty appointments. The world is not ending. I don't blame you though. I'm sure your only exposure to the state of the US is on an video game forum.[/QUOTE]
Stop getting so defensive over some rich bitch that paid her way into the position.
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789174]
Hate yourself. Do something about it if it bothers you so much.[/QUOTE]
Next time could you inform youreslf before you [URL="http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37253462"]criticize someone's country?[/URL]
[QUOTE=KillRay;51789435]Sometimes of us have been protesting. The problem is that the government has become deaf dumb and blind[/QUOTE]
Government officials can be voted out. Protesters are on the tv like 24 fucking 7. If you're mad you can easily get your voice heard.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51789424]I've never heard that standard ever before. Burden of proof is always on the accuser. Technically, since you're accusing her of being a bad pick, the burden of proof is on you, not him.[/QUOTE]
How fucking wrong can you ever be about the burden of proof.
These people are saying "Betsy is a good choice for SecEdu" which INSTANTLY means they have a burden to show "why is she a good choice for SecEdu"
Her opponents are saying "Please prove to us why she is a good choice for SecEdu" which does NOT involve any burden of proof.
For your statement to be true, you would also have to say that "Well prove to me why she ISN'T a good choice for SecEdu" isn't fallacious.
Though since you're throwing around very specific terms without knowing what they mean, I suspect you actually do believe that.
[QUOTE=Phycosymo;51789438][url=https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/sep/02/indian-workers-strike-in-fight-for-higher-wages]Inform yourself before you[/url] [url=http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-india-37253462]criticize someone's country?[/url][/QUOTE]
Yeah that's great man. I'll enjoy my running water and sewage infrastructure.
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789440]Government officials can be voted out. Protesters are on the tv like 24 fucking 7. If you're mad you can easily get your voice heard.[/QUOTE]
The protests are heard but not being listened to lmao have you seen the shit that's been being passed anyway
And we can't vote out the shitty justice soon to be implimented
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789422]So far from being true. The US will not collapse because of shitty appointments. The world is not ending. I don't blame you though. I'm sure your only exposure to the state of the US is on an video game forum.[/QUOTE]
Maybe not, maybe it's just the icing on a big cake made entirely of shit. What are you defending? Why are you trying to get a rise out of people? Had a bad day?
Got a raise by Kremlin to shill harder.
The 24 hour protest is about to wrap up.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51789424]I've never heard that standard ever before. Burden of proof is always on the accuser. Technically, since you're accusing her of being a bad pick, the burden of proof is on you, not him.[/QUOTE]
She openly advocates for privatization of our school system, the burden is on you to defend it. Stop deflecting.
[QUOTE=Crumpet;51789453]Maybe not, maybe it's just the icing on a big cake made entirely of shit. Why are you trying to get a rise out of people? Had a bad day?[/QUOTE]
We are with problems but the exaggerations that go on in SH are tiresome.
[QUOTE=DogGunn;51789270]Do you think Pence wouldn't have her in the same position?[/QUOTE]
I'm meaning Trump along with Pence and the cabinet. Start over with a reformed election system and elect someone sane who will have a competent administration.
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51789424]I've never heard that standard ever before. Burden of proof is always on the accuser. Technically, since you're accusing her of being a bad pick, the burden of proof is on you, not him.[/QUOTE]
Alright then, I'll label a list of reasons why she's a bad pick.
Conflict of interest cannot be ruled out considering how vast her family wealth is and how many ties to education based companies she's got. Democrat senators and advocacy groups want a concrete assurance she will distance herself and her decisions from her holdings.
She hasnt yet met the ethics committee of Congress to decide how extricating herself from conflicts of interest will work. A detailed signed agreement to this effect should've been present before this pick was made. She also has no experience in any form of public education as a teacher or as an official as well.
The biggest issue, by far, is the school voucher program, which is essentially an erosion of church and state when it comes to religious schools. Some of said schools teach creationism instead of the theory of evolution, and if not for the Blaine amendments in several states, those schools would also have public funding.
Furthermore, her lack of experience shows some rather glaring holes in her knowledge, and it's no secret that she's considered one of the least favored picks on that note alone. For instance, she doesn't know the basic difference between test scores measuring proficiency of a student or their growth over time. She declined to take a position over that guns keeping grizzly bears out of school business, either.
Then there's the business about the federal disability law where she said "it's up to states to enforce it" without realizing it was already a law in the first place. Also, the Obama administration guidelines about sexual assault were never committed to by her.
She also expended large sums in donations to Republican senators, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789473]We are with problems but the exaggerations that go on in SH are tiresome.[/QUOTE]
I don't think they are exaggerations. Sitting around idly assuming everything will be fine is half the reason you're in this mess.
[QUOTE=EcksDee;51789444]How fucking wrong can you ever be about the burden of proof.
These people are saying "Betsy is a good choice for SecEdu" which INSTANTLY means they have a burden to show "why is she a good choice for SecEdu"
Her opponents are saying "Please prove to us why she is a good choice for SecEdu" which does NOT involve any burden of proof.
For your statement to be true, you would also have to say that "Well prove to me why she ISN'T a good choice for SecEdu" isn't fallacious.
Though since you're throwing around very specific terms without knowing what they mean, I suspect you actually do believe that.[/QUOTE]
Who in here said that she was a good choice? Nobody. Nobody made that claim. Instead, a user was told to defend a claim he hasn't yet made in this thread. So no, burden of proof is not on him to defend a claim he hasn't made.
If you would hop away from your witch hunt for people to "DEFEND THIS NOW!!111!!1!1!1!!!" and actually read the thread, you would see this.
[QUOTE=DiscoMelon;51789469]She openly advocates for privatization of our school system, the burden is on you to defend it. Stop deflecting.[/QUOTE]
I have no burden to defend anything whatsoever. I have made no claim about Trump's SecEd pick in this thread to defend.
I don't think "deflect" means what you think it means.
Honest question here: Is it worth killing her over this?
Someone help me out and please I'm not dumb or angry, and i'm not honestly considering doing anything crazy I just need a role model or mentor with some wisdom.
I am still learning a lot about life, and the past months have been having me ask these deep philosophical questions regarding morality and life and death. Like is it acceptable to kill someone if it means a higher standard of living for millions? For thousands? For ten? How much freedom is essential and worth waging war for, and how much freedom is "extra"? I know it seems like I'm insane or deranged but that's part of why I hate these thoughts, because the answers are really important, and I honestly don't know the answers or have any guidance, yet even asking about it makes me sound dangerous. Please can an adult help me out?
[QUOTE=EcksDee;51789444]How fucking wrong can you ever be about the burden of proof.
These people are saying "Betsy is a good choice for SecEdu" which INSTANTLY means they have a burden to show "why is she a good choice for SecEdu"
Her opponents are saying "Please prove to us why she is a good choice for SecEdu" which does NOT involve any burden of proof.
For your statement to be true, you would also have to say that "Well prove to me why she ISN'T a good choice for SecEdu" isn't fallacious.
Though since you're throwing around very specific terms without knowing what they mean, I suspect you actually do believe that.[/QUOTE]
What a shitty asshole thing to post
Fuck I quoted the wrong thing
[QUOTE=Zombinie;51789525]Honest question here: Is it worth killing her over this?
Someone help me out and please I'm not dumb or angry, and i'm not honestly considering doing anything crazy I just need a role model or mentor with some wisdom.
I am still learning a lot about life, and the past months have been having me ask these deep philosophical questions regarding morality and life and death. Like is it acceptable to kill someone if it means a higher standard of living for millions? For thousands? For ten? How much freedom is essential and worth waging war for, and how much freedom is "extra"? I know it seems like I'm insane or deranged but that's part of why I hate these thoughts, because the answers are really important, and I honestly don't know the answers or have any guidance, yet even asking about it makes me sound dangerous. Please can an adult help me out?[/QUOTE]
No.
[QUOTE=Mr_Razzums;51789445]Yeah that's great man. I'll enjoy my running water and sewage infrastructure.[/QUOTE]
I meant to call this a shitty thing to post
[QUOTE=Tigster;51789537]What a shitty asshole thing to post [/QUOTE]
What? How?
[editline]7th February 2017[/editline]
Oh nvm
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;51789510]Alright then, I'll label a list of reasons why she's a bad pick.
Conflict of interest cannot be ruled out considering how vast her family wealth is and how many ties to education based companies she's got. Democrat senators and advocacy groups want a concrete assurance she will distance herself and her decisions from her holdings.
She hasnt yet met the ethics committee of Congress to decide how extricating herself from conflicts of interest will work. A detailed signed agreement to this effect should've been present before this pick was made. She also has no experience in any form of public education as a teacher or as an official as well.
The biggest issue, by far, is the school voucher program, which is essentially an erosion of church and state when it comes to religious schools. Some of said schools teach creationism instead of the theory of evolution, and if not for the Blaine amendments in several states, those schools would also have public funding.
Furthermore, her lack of experience shows some rather glaring holes in her knowledge, and it's no secret that she's considered one of the least favored picks on that note alone. For instance, she doesn't know the basic difference between test scores measuring proficiency of a student or their growth over time. She declined to take a position over that guns keeping grizzly bears out of school business, either.
Then there's the business about the federal disability law where she said "it's up to states to enforce it" without realizing it was already a law in the first place. Also, the Obama administration guidelines about sexual assault were never committed to by her.
She also expended large sums in donations to Republican senators, to the tune of tens of thousands of dollars.[/QUOTE]
Those are all good points. I don't really care for her, but I do support voucher programs, with the exception that schools that receive these vouchers are to use the funds solely on education, not extra religious content, and that they follow education standards and requirements (like teaching evolution, even if they teach creationism along with it. That's how my high school biology teacher did it and it satisfied everyone). The reasons I like voucher programs is that even though some of the schools may be religious, their quality of education and preparation for college can still be leagues above what's done in public schools for a fraction of the cost. If it's cheaper and provides a much better education, I don't see the downside of them slipping in creationism.
On everything else though, she's an idiot and it is troubling.
[QUOTE=Zillamaster55;51789547]What? How?
[editline]7th February 2017[/editline]
Oh nvm[/QUOTE]
My bad bb blame the phone
So why do Republicans hate everything? They hate the environment, they hate human rights, they obviously hate education for wanting to vote this woman in. Amazing how money can make a person say "fuck morals"
[QUOTE=MissingGlitch;51789569]So why do Republicans hate everything? They hate the environment, they hate human rights, they obviously hate education for wanting to vote this woman in. Amazing how money can make a person say "fuck morals"[/QUOTE]
"We gotta spread the good words of the LORD and the truth about the world's creation to as many rugrats as possible"
[QUOTE=Silence I Kill You;51789562]Those are all good points. I don't really care for her, but I do support voucher programs, with the exception that schools that receive these vouchers are to use the funds solely on education, not extra religious content, and that they follow education standards and requirements (like teaching evolution, even if they teach creationism along with it. That's how my high school biology teacher did it and it satisfied everyone). The reasons I like voucher programs is that even though some of the schools may be religious, their quality of education and preparation for college can still be leagues above what's done in public schools for a fraction of the cost. If it's cheaper and provides a much better education, I don't see the downside of them slipping in creationism.
On everything else though, she's an idiot and it is troubling.[/QUOTE]
I see mountains of problems with slipping creationism into schools. Those teachings don't belong anywhere near schools as it is a falsehood.
Teaching creationism is like teaching the holocaust and then immediately talking to students about holocaust denial.
well guys look on the bright side
at least it inst as bad as malawi, LOL!
stop criticizing her we dont have it as bad as malawi yet
[QUOTE=God of Ashes;51789578]I see mountains of problems with slipping creationism into schools. Those teachings don't belong anywhere near schools as it is a falsehood.
Teaching creationism is like teaching the holocaust and then immediately talking to students about holocaust denial.[/QUOTE]
You're willing to trash a school that outperforms in every metric because a biology teacher takes 30 seconds to say "Some people believe that god created everything as it is." at the beginning of a week long lesson plan on evolution? I'm not.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.