Politics 20/20

[Gfted1]

@Hurlshot Ill do my best to muscle through.

[Hurlshort]

7 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

@Hurlshot Ill do my best to muscle through.

Is avoiding jury duty the main reason you do not vote?

[Gfted1]

7 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Is avoiding jury duty the main reason you do not vote?

No thats only 1% of the reason. The other 142% is complete apathy.

Although Trump is enough of a dumpster fire to have at least made me consider voting, I trust that IL will vote D as always.

[Pidesco]

14 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

No thats only 1% of the reason. The other 142% is complete apathy.

Although Trump is enough of a dumpster fire to have at least made me consider voting, I trust that IL will vote D as always.

Down ballot, though. I mean the specific conditions of this election makes the Presidential election especially consequential, but local elections are much more important to your daily life, regardless of the election year.

[Gfted1]

30 minutes ago, Pidesco said:

Down ballot, though. I mean the specific conditions of this election makes the Presidential election especially consequential, but local elections are much more important to your daily life, regardless of the election year.

Youre probably right. Ive never even paid attention to the down ballot candidates before, but now that I know I have a voter registration card (who knew!) maybe Ill vote. But not if I have to go there and stand in line. My card directs me to some voting location at a nearby church but I wonder if IL has electronic voting.

[Pidesco]

3 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Youre probably right. Ive never even paid attention to the down ballot candidates before, but now that I know I have a voter registration card (who knew!) maybe Ill vote. But not if I have to go there and stand in line. My card directs me to some voting location at a nearby church but I wonder if IL has electronic voting.

https://howto.vote/vote/en/il.html

[Gfted1]

Bummer.  

[Hurlshort]

I've never actually stood in a line to vote. I imagine it depends on what time you show up, but most of the polling stations around me move pretty smoothly. Granted I don't live in a dense urban center. I'm usually in and out in about 10 minutes.

[Achilles]

1 minute ago, Hurlshot said:

I've never actually stood in a line to vote. I imagine it depends on what time you show up, but most of the polling stations around me move pretty smoothly. Granted I don't live in a dense urban center. I'm usually in and out in about 10 minutes.

I normally vote by mail, but I did early, in-person voting this time around. I went expecting lines, but got in and out with no wait.

[Pidesco]

I assume that if you look for voting lines in your congressional district on google pictures and news should appear.

[Hurlshort]

Right now I'm trying to put together a lesson plan on journalism, censorship, satire, social media, and education. It started out as a lesson about the 1st Amendment and section 230. But then the Charlie Hebdo situation escalated. I'd love to chunk it up, but I only see these kids twice a week right now and the way the news is moving, I'll have some other massive stories to cover next week.

Oh and of course I need to cover the curriculum as well.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

11 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

I've never actually stood in a line to vote. I imagine it depends on what time you show up, but most of the polling stations around me move pretty smoothly. Granted I don't live in a dense urban center. I'm usually in and out in about 10 minutes.

Where I am there are lines you can spend hours in waiting to vote. I do live in a dense urban area though, and the administration seems to like choking off voting venues.

[213374U]

7 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Right now I'm trying to put together a lesson plan on journalism, censorship, satire, social media, and education. It started out as a lesson about the 1st Amendment and section 230. But then the Charlie Hebdo situation escalated. I'd love to chunk it up, but I only see these kids twice a week right now and the way the news is moving, I'll have some other massive stories to cover next week.

Oh and of course I need to cover the curriculum as well.

You expect something worse than a teacher being beheaded in broad daylight by a teenager to happen in the next few days?

Heh, I hope not. It is 2020, though.

[Achilles]

9 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Right now I'm trying to put together a lesson plan on journalism, censorship, satire, social media, and education. It started out as a lesson about the 1st Amendment and section 230. But then the Charlie Hebdo situation escalated. I'd love to chunk it up, but I only see these kids twice a week right now and the way the news is moving, I'll have some other massive stories to cover next week.

Oh and of course I need to cover the curriculum as well.

Have you read this?

[Hurlshort]

12 minutes ago, 213374U said:

You expect something worse than a teacher being beheaded in broad daylight by a teenager to happen in the next few days?

Heh, I hope not. It is 2020, though.

I'm mostly trying to figure out how to cover that story without sounding like a preacher, but also in a timely manner. Trying to find good material for it is a huge minefield.

14 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Have you read this?

Are you trying to make my job more difficult?

[Achilles]

1 minute ago, Hurlshot said:

Are you trying to make my job more difficult?

This is making your job more difficult. The other was trying to help

[Malcador]

37 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

Right now I'm trying to put together a lesson plan on journalism, censorship, satire, social media, and education.

More SJW Cultural Marxist indoctrination, no doubt.

[BruceVC]

1 hour ago, Hurlshot said:

Right now I'm trying to put together a lesson plan on journalism, censorship, satire, social media, and education. It started out as a lesson about the 1st Amendment and section 230. But then the Charlie Hebdo situation escalated. I'd love to chunk it up, but I only see these kids twice a week right now and the way the news is moving, I'll have some other massive stories to cover next week.

Oh and of course I need to cover the curriculum as well.

It concerns me that any teacher is suppose to create such an important lesson outside of the official state curriculum. If I was you I would raise this as  a risk, the last thing you want is to unintentionally create confusion or anxiety around these topics. Rather let experts do it and then you can run with there research that, I assume, would be endorsed by the state?

[Hurlshort]

Just now, BruceVC said:

It concerns me that any teacher is suppose to create such an important lesson outside of the official state curriculum. If I was you I would raise this as  a risk, the last thing you want is to unintentionally create confusion or anxiety around these topics. Rather let experts do it and then you can run with there research that, I assume, would be endorsed by the state?

I am the expert, asshat.

[Malcador]

5 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

I am the expert, asshat.

I am curious, how much discretion do you have when making lesson plans anyway ? Just told "Do Topic X" from higher up and it's up to you to determine how  ?

Edited October 26, 2020 by Malcador

[Gfted1]

26 minutes ago, Malcador said:

I am curious, how much discretion do you have when making lesson plans anyway ? Just told "Do Topic X" from higher up and it's up to you to determine how  ?

Surely theres a syllabus handed down from above, but they probably allow a little wiggle room. I suppose thats close enough to expertise.

[Hurlshort]

51 minutes ago, Malcador said:

I am curious, how much discretion do you have when making lesson plans anyway ? Just told "Do Topic X" from higher up and it's up to you to determine how  ?

Yep, that's basically it. We have certain educational standards we have to cover. We have a textbook that covers those standards. How we teach it is going to vary greatly, and is why we all go to school for 5+ years, student teach, take credentialing tests, attend professional development, etc. 

New teachers lean heavily on the textbook. You have to figure a new teacher relies on it for about 80% of the year's content and instruction. As you get further along in teaching, it becomes easier to streamline the boring textbook content and introduce more varied sources and lessons to students. I'd say I was down to about 30% with the previous textbooks while still covering the standards. We just adopted new books, and I have less teaching time in digital learning, so I'm probably back up to about 60% on the textbook this year. 

I am sure some states, districts, and administrations are way more heavy handed in forcing lessons on teachers. I know it is a lot more stifling to do math and ELA in my district. But Social Science is a pretty magical subject.   

[Zoraptor]

15 hours ago, Gromnir said:

and why on earth do you feel need to reimagine the questions when those questions are there for all to see? is no need to try and invent a simile when exact words and context is available.

Gee whiz, my crimes are manifest. I use an analogy to describe something, big deal. If that's all you got, you got nothing. And that's literally all you got. Except, as always, the will to go on and on in the hope the other person will simply give up from boredom.

Would Biden or Trump have responded well to a question on "What would you do about Artsakh?" out of the blue. Nah, of course not. Good questions intended to get an informative response always supply the context, because in those cases the desired result is an informative response. Firing unrelated questions out with no context is bad interviewing, at least if the idea is to get an informed response instead of confuse the interviewee.

13 hours ago, Gromnir said:

wasn't our prediction.

See, I use simile to make a point, you baldly and prosaically rewrite things to what you wish happened. You didn't post that prediction with academic disinterest; you posted it, you actively defended it, and you did so consistently because it's what you wanted to happen- and logic be damned. And that's why the litany of your mistakes gets posted every time, stupid assertion you wish was true, followed by doggedly defending said assertion by any means necessary including simply making stuff up, every time.

It's only become 'Gromnir just post interesting article'- that just happens, coincidentally, blind luck of the draw, to fit his neocon wet dream US supremacist foreign policy- as some sort of interesting conversation starter since it became manifestly obvious what a load of old todgers it was. And note, I'm not saying the article was literally a load of wrinkly love sausages, it's another figure of speech.

FTR, Russia's foreign reserves are higher now than they were in 2014. Even as an interesting conversation starter the article was utterly utterly worthless, and has been proven so.

Quote

regardless, is best not to take zor claims at face value.

Lol. I complain about you arguing consistently in bad faith and what are your efforts? Chop context off the end of the Johnson transcript exactly as I complained about; the article you posted and supported defended etc wasn't actually your views- because it's now obviously and conclusively wrong- and me pointing out that the report you used to assert that the US Government Did Nothing Wrong in the lead up to Iraq was nowhere as vindicating as you made out. All you do is prove my point that you're incapable of arguing in good faith and are only really interested in shouting your views as loudly and persistently as possible until the other person gives up.

The last part of course puts anyone arguing with you in a bit of a dilemma.

[Guard Dog]

I voted yesterday. There was a short wait but no biggie. For President I voted for Jorgensen of course. And no it was far from a “wasted” vote. The winner of the electoral votes of my state is an absolute foregone conclusion. A vote for Trump or Biden would’ve been wasted. Not that I would ever cast my vote for either of them. On the other hand every single vote that Jorgensen receives is invaluable. Not because it will make her president. That is mathematically impossible. But every vote the Libertarian candidate receives improves the standing of the Libertarian party, improves their process for getting ballot access in 2024, and move them one vote closer to major party status. So a vote for the third-party candidates that have nationwide access is anything but wasted. And the best of all I don’t have to lose sleep knowing I voted for a scoundrel.

[Gromnir]

3 minutes ago, Zoraptor said:

 

Lol. I complain about you arguing consistently in bad faith and what are your efforts? Chop context off the end of the Johnson transcript exactly as I complained about; the article you posted and supported defended etc wasn't actually your views- because it's now obviously and conclusively wrong- and me pointing out that the report you used to assert that the US Government Did Nothing Wrong in the lead up to Iraq was nowhere as vindicating as you made out. All you do is prove my point that you're incapable of arguing in good faith and are only really interested in shouting your views as loudly and persistently as possible until the other person gives up.

The last part of course puts anyone arguing with you in a bit of a dilemma.

more bs

we never suggested US were blameless leading up to iraq invasion. opposite. have criticized the cherry picking o' intelligence by politicians o' available evidence, which were a blix complaint. we complained that the wh criminal mislead 'bout the numbers which would be needed to affect regime change. we criticized the bumbling incompetence and obtuseness o' multiple individuals in the bush administration, and we still do. however, to claim the administration knew 'bout  absence o' wmds and lied 'bout such is false. that were your claim and is what inspired the blix stuff--blix made clear he didn't believe US lied 'bout iraqi wmds but he did say US were too certain in spite o' insufficient and often contradictory data. the senate report you quoted out of context, doing same nonsense you accuse us o' doing and same idiocy which bush administration did to convince selves 'o the need to invade iraq, would be amusing save for fact is utter predictable and is your one-trick pony. 

and is kinda obvious you used simile to distract from reality. we would argue further on the johnson interview, but absolute nobody is listening anymore and you are a lost cause. contrary to your silly gotcha narrative, which even johnson didn't claim or agree to, anybody reading the transcript can see the questions and context. were like, "asking a series of questions about car mechanics" before hitting johnson with aleppo? not even close. three questions, not all on the same focused subject, and one o' which had johnson reference regime change. gotcha? 

*chuckle*

as is your typical response, you make a claim which you no doubt believe, and depend on the absence o' anybody interested enough to bother checking your claims, sources, graphs or quotes.

HA! Good Fun!