(05.12.10): "Arizona bill targeting ethnic studies signed into law" (N. Cruz, LAT) [Archive]

Spang

05-12-2010, 05:49 PM

New AZ Law Prohibits Latino Curriculum That Benefits Students

Arizona Governor Jan Brewer has signed a new bill into law that specifically targets Latino citizens and residents, prohibiting Arizona school districts from teaching Latino-specific curriculum. However, the Arizona legislature and executive office failed to recognize that students enrolled in the now prohibited courses actually do better in school than their peers.

Ethnic Studies Students Outperform Their Counterparts

Students Enrolled In Raza Studies Program Graduate At Higher Rates Than Their Peers. According to OSU researchers "Meyers and Orozco are concerned about the proposed elimination of programs that have been documented to help student learning and success. The researchers said that Raza Studies students graduate at rates that are higher than their white peers, and enroll in college at a rate that approaches 70 percent. Raza Studies students also outperform their peers in Arizona's standardized testing. 'Ample scholarship in a variety of disciplines now conclude that rates of student success - particularly among minority students - is positively correlated with culturally relevant and community-minded curriculum,' Orozco said."

Ethnic Studies Courses Increase Students' Test Scores. The Arizona Republic reported: "Students are on waiting lists to get into the [ethnic studies] courses at Tucson and Cholla High Magnet Schools, said Augustine Romero, who heads the district program. Romero also teaches one of the courses, U.S. Government and Social Justice. This course teaches the historic functions of government by tracking the changes in court decisions and legislation that reflect America's changing attitudes toward minorities. Romero said the district supports the courses for good reasons: They connect students to their cultural past and their roles in American history, including students with Native American, Mexican, Asian and African American heritages. They heighten student interest and make the courses relevant to their everyday experience. Data collected since 2002 by the Tucson school district show students who attend the courses perform better on AIMS, the state's standardized test, than students who do not attend the courses. That fulfills the goal of No Child Left Behind, which is to raise student achievement among minority students."

The Source (http://mediamattersaction.org/factcheck/201005120004)

Suzan

05-12-2010, 06:02 PM

Good! It is designed to combat divisive and hateful classes like those taught by this guy:

http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=56641

YouTube- L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s)

(He's in Los Angeles, but there are others like him around the country, fomenting revolution and hatred rather than teaching students useful and honest material)

Did they really need to ban all ethnic studies because of this class? One person teaches a hateful class and all classes should be banned? On that basis, let's just close the schools. And as YOU point out, this isn't an Arizona class.

When I think about Arizona now the image I get is of Jan Brewer armed with a pen. :eek:

foxyladi

05-12-2010, 07:18 PM

i don,t like any school teaching hate here or in the M.E

Spang

05-14-2010, 01:53 PM

The Man Behind Arizona's Anti-Ethnic Studies Law

Arizona's new law restricting ethnic studies is the brainchild of the state's ambitious top education official, Tom Horne, who is locked in a Republican primary for Attorney General against a prominent ally of hardline Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Horne, the state's superintendent of public instruction since 2002, has long sought to kill the Tucson school district's ethnic studies classes, including La Raza studies -- and he wrote the bill to target that single program. "It's just like the old South, and it's long past time that we prohibited it," he has said of ethnic studies classes that, he claims, teach Hispanics to resent whites.

Horne is now trumpeting the bill, which he wrote and pushed through the legislature, on his attorney general campaign website. His GOP primary opponent, Arpaio-ally Andrew Thomas, is a right-wing champion of anti-immigration policies.

Parallels have been drawn between the new ethnic studies law and the state's immigration law, signed by Gov. Jan Brewer less than a month before she signed the ethnic studies bill without public comment Tuesday. But the new legislation explicitly targets Hispanics in a way that the immigration bill -- which, some proponents argued, was about public safety and jobs -- did not.

Bruce Merrill, a state pollster and professor emeritus at Arizona State University, notes that Tucson is heavily Hispanic. "The population has grown very quickly, and I dont know how you can look at the [ethnic studies] law in any other way than being punitive," he tells TPMmuckraker. "It's obviously more directed toward Hispanics as a group, keeping them down or being fearful of them, in terms of this growing population threat."

"This is classic identity politics," says Rodolfo Espino, a professor at ASU's School of Politics and Global Studies. "The rhetoric coming from Tom Horne and his supporters is anything detracting from teaching what is American identity should not be supported by taxpayer dollars."

Espino says there are strikingly different political cultures in Phoenix, Arizona's capital and largest city, and in Tucson, the second largest city and home of the school district that offers ethnic studies classes.

"Tucson has Hispanic political organization going back decades, a Mexican-American community going back decades," he says. "It's a prime target for folks like Tom Horne. They've put the cross hairs on that school district

The new law, which you can read here, bars classes that "promote the overthrow of the United States government ... promote resentment toward a race or class of people ... are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group ... [or] advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals."

When it takes effect on Dec. 31, districts in violation (as determined by the superintendent or the state board of education) will face a 10% cut of state education funds. The director of the Tucson district's Mexican-American studies department says the district, which also offers courses in African-American studies, Native American studies and Asian studies, is not in violation and won't change its offerings.

A very small number of students would be affected by any change. The Los Angeles Times reported that only 3% of the Tucson district's 55,000 students take ethnic studies classes.

But as a political symbol the bill may have a much greater effect.

Horne's opponent in the primary for attorney general is former Maricopa County Attorney Andrew Thomas, who, as a top ally of Sheriff Joe Arpaio, has sterling anti-immigration credentials. As can be seen in this new ad, where Thomas poses in front of an imposing fence on the border -- and in both candidates' pronouncements to get tough on border security -- immigration is a key issue in the race.

The ethnic studies law is Horne's answer to Thomas' immigration record. Horne's campaign website currently includes headlines like "Tom Horne Championed Bill to Ban Ethnic Studies" and "Alarming Video Shows a L.A. Teacher Calling for Mexican Revolt in the U.S." above a picture of Hispanic protesters of the law dressed in quasi-paramilitary garb and bearing pictures of Cesar Chavez.

Espino, the ASU professor, says it's not just the dynamics of the primary season that explains why the law passed now. Both the immigration and ethnic studies laws were made possible by "an aligning of the planets," he says.

"What allowed for it to pass is the fact that you finally have a friendly governor in office who is going to sign things like this. [Former Governor Janet] Napolitano was really quick with the veto pen over these sorts of things. Having her gone now has opened the floodgates. A lot of these players feel empowered."

The Source (http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/05/man_behind_arizonas_no_ethnic_studies_law.php?utm_ source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+TPMmuckraker+%28TPMmuckraker% 29)

Horne isn’t the first to take up ethnic studies as a political crusade. The battle over ethnic studies originated on college campuses decades ago when minority student groups began pressing for classes that covered underrepresented viewpoints. As recently as 2007, Columbia University students (and one professor) staged a hunger strike to protest a Dead White Male-centric curriculum and push for an expansion of ethnic studies. On the other side, conservatives like David Horowitz have crusaded against ethnic studies for being a socially divisive product of liberal groupthink on college campuses.

But Arizona’s new law has taken what was once an academic debate to a new level of vitriolic fear-mongering. Horne says that he wrote the law specifically to target a grade-school program in Tucson that he says is teaching Hispanics to resent whites through "ethnic chauvinism." Horne’s law makes no pretense of engaging in an honest pedagogical discussion—rather he skips straight to the inflammatory charge that such learning could encourage students to revolt against US government, effectively legitimizing fears of a Mexican “reconquista.” Where students of ethnic studies were once merely criticized as enemies of the Western canon, they're now being villified as enemies of Arizona state.

The Source (http://motherjones.com/mojo/2010/05/brains-behind-arizona-ethnic-studies-ban?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Motherjones%2Fmojoblog+%28Mot herJones.com+|+MoJoBlog%29)

sojourner

05-14-2010, 02:18 PM

You may have heard that Arizona has banned “ethnic studies” in public school classrooms beginning in January 2011. Except that it’s not true. Here are the relevant excerpts from the law creating the ban:

A school district or charter school in this state shall not include in its program of instruction any courses or classes that include any of the following:

1. Promote the overthrow of the United States government.
2. Promote resentment toward a race or class of people.
3. Are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group.
4. Advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of people as individuals.

I suppose you could define these things as “ethnic studies,” and in that case, Arizona has banned them — and good for them. But assuming you don’t submit to this abuse of the English language, read on:

This section shall not be construed to restrict or prohibit…

(3.) Courses or classes that include the history of any ethnic group and that are open to all students, unless the course or class violates subsection A.
(4) Courses or classes that include the discussion of controversial aspects of history.
(5) Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to restrict or prohibit the instruction of the Holocaust, any other instance of genocide, or the historical oppression of a particular group of people based on ethnicity, race or class.

So this is not an attempt to whitewash any history of oppression or keep discussions of ethnicity out of education. It’s an attempt to prevent students from becoming mush-heads who cannot read or write because their classroom time was taken up by brainwashing sessions by left-wing racial grievance-mongers. Source (http://www.sfexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/arizona-didnt-ban-ethnic-studies-it-banned-anti-american-racial-chauvanism-93780634.html)

sojourner

05-14-2010, 02:27 PM

TUCSON (KGUN9-TV) - Tucson Unified School District has insisted repeatedly that its ethnic studies program does not violate the terms of Arizona's new law placing restrictions on such courses. Are those statements true? A closer look at TUSD's teaching materials casts doubt on some of TUSD's denials. But even so, that does not answer the larger question of whether students have a right to study the material or whether Arizona has a right to stop them.

Arizona House Bill 2281 has led to student and teacher protests and threats of lawsuits, and has drawn sharp criticism from United Nations human rights experts. The backlash erupted even though the measure does not ban ethnic studies programs outright. Instead, it places restrictions on them. Specifically, schools cannot present instructional material that advocates the overthrow of the U.S. government, promotes resentment toward any race or class of people or advocates ethnic solidarity. Nor can schools design courses for pupils of any particular ethnic group. TUSD insists that its program does none of those things and has said it will make no changes in the course.

What are the facts?

9 on Your Side took a closer look. One of the textbooks that TUSD uses in its ethnic studies program is Chicano!, by F. Arturo Rosales. The book teaches the history of racism and oppression in the United States directed against the Mexican, Mexican-American, and Hispanic populations. As the name implies, a large portion of the textbook is devoted to the Chicano movement that sprang up to fight social injustice and to push for civil rights. There are some similarities between the Chicano movement tactics that the book documents and the tactics some TUSD students have practicing recently.

The cover of the book features graphic art of protesters with their fists in the air. Pages 248, 249 and 253 feature photographs of Chicano movement members with raised fists. The photograph on page 253 shows a student with a raised fist sitting in a classroom with other students; the text on that page makes the point that Chicano studies programs in the Southwest are "the most visible vestige" of the Chicano movement. A review of KGUN9 News footage over the past week shows many TUSD students raising their fists in the same fashion as those shown in the textbook.
When the sun came up at Tucson High School on Friday morning of last week, the light of the new day found several protesters wearing brown berets and revolutionary-style garb. At his Tucson press conference on Wednesday, state schools superintendent Tom Horne presented an enlarged photograph of that protest culled from a Los Angeles newspaper and pointed to it as an example of how TUSD students are learning hatred and what he calls "ethnic chauvinism."

There is a big flaw in that argument, though, according to Sean Arce, TUSD's director of Mexican American/Raza studies. In an interview with KGUN9's April Madison on Thursday, Arce insisted that not one of those beret-wearing protesters was a TUSD student. He told Madison that those particular protesters were adults from other communities.

Arce did not deny that protesters seen walking out of class and pumping their fists in the air in recent days were TUSD students. But he was not willing to concede that in doing so, they took any inspiration from his course. "These are historical episodes. We look at all historic episodes in their totality.... We don't have workshops on how to protest or how to organize in the community. These are simply historical episodes." When asked directly if there's any chance students might be emulating what they saw in the textbook, Arce replied, "Not whatsoever."

If that statement might seem like a stretch to some, Arce has other important facts that are much harder to argue with. He grows most passionate when talking about the academic success of his ethnic studies students. "We have increased academic achievement levels, we have increased literacy rates in our classes, our college matriculation rates of students in our classes are around 80% for Latinos, and a national average is 25%."

According to Arce's figures, kids participating in the ethnic studies program have a graduation rate of nearly 98%. By contrast, the national graduation rate for Mexican Americans is only 44%. In addition, Arce's figures show that his ethnic studies students are three times more likely to pass the state's AIMS reading test, 4 times more likely to pass the writing section, and 2.5 times more likely to pass the AIMS math test.

A new report released on Thursday gives even more meaning to those figures. The Pew Hispanic Center reports that when Hispanics drop out of high school, less than one in ten ever goes back to earn a GED, or high school equivalency degree. The GED success rate is twice as high for African-Americans, and three times as high for whites. Source (http://www.kgun9.com/global/story.asp?s=12477521)

Suzan

05-14-2010, 03:20 PM

Interesting article, Soj. Thanks for posting. It does a good job of explaining what the law is trying to do. It doesn't ban all ethnic studies, but from my reading, the restrictions it requires could ultimately eliminate most classes. It appears that those that survive would have to omit elements of the actual histories of the ethnic groups, like the Chicano movement in this country.

9 on Your Side took a closer look. One of the textbooks that TUSD uses in its ethnic studies program is Chicano!, by F. Arturo Rosales. The book teaches the history of racism and oppression in the United States directed against the Mexican, Mexican-American, and Hispanic populations. As the name implies, a large portion of the textbook is devoted to the Chicano movement that sprang up to fight social injustice and to push for civil rights. There are some similarities between the Chicano movement tactics that the book documents and the tactics some TUSD students have practicing recently.

I appreciated knowing this as well:

If that statement might seem like a stretch to some, Arce has other important facts that are much harder to argue with. He grows most passionate when talking about the academic success of his ethnic studies students. "We have increased academic achievement levels, we have increased literacy rates in our classes, our college matriculation rates of students in our classes are around 80% for Latinos, and a national average is 25%."

According to Arce's figures, kids participating in the ethnic studies program have a graduation rate of nearly 98%. By contrast, the national graduation rate for Mexican Americans is only 44%. In addition, Arce's figures show that his ethnic studies students are three times more likely to pass the state's AIMS reading test, 4 times more likely to pass the writing section, and 2.5 times more likely to pass the AIMS math test.

A new report released on Thursday gives even more meaning to those figures. The Pew Hispanic Center reports that when Hispanics drop out of high school, less than one in ten ever goes back to earn a GED, or high school equivalency degree. The GED success rate is twice as high for African-Americans, and three times as high for whites.

Jim744

05-14-2010, 04:25 PM

I'm all for American ethnic studies so immigrants can assimilate and learn about our culture and history. After all they came here and left their homelands because they didn't like it there. I think it would be great for those who want to learn about their ethnic backgrounds to return to those countries for a period of time to learn.

In college, one can take courses to learn about other cultures also.

Spang

05-14-2010, 07:23 PM

Outlawing Latinos’ Heritage

At least we don’t have to pretend anymore. Arizona’s passing of that mean-spirited new immigration law wasn’t about high-minded principle or the need to maintain public order. Apparently, it was all about putting Latinos in their place.

It’s hard to reach any other conclusion following the state’s latest swipe at Latinos. On Tuesday, Gov. Jan Brewer signed a measure making it illegal for any course in the public schools to “advocate ethnic solidarity.” Arizona’s top education official, Tom Horne, fought for the new law as a weapon against a program in Tucson that teaches Mexican-American students about their history and culture.

Horne claims the Tucson classes teach “ethnic chauvinism.” He has complained that young Mexican-Americans are falsely being led to believe that they belong to an oppressed minority. The way to dispel that notion, it seems, is to pass oppressive new legislation aimed squarely at Mexican-Americans. That’ll teach the kids a lesson, all right: We have power. You don’t.

Arizona is already facing criticism and boycotts over its “breathing while Latino” law, which in essence requires police to identify and jail undocumented immigrants. Now the state adds insult to that injury.

The education bill begins with a bizarre piece of nonsense, making it illegal for public or charter schools to offer courses that “promote the overthrow of the United States government.” Then it shifts from weird to offensive, prohibiting classes that “promote resentment toward a race or class of people,” that “are designed primarily for pupils of a particular ethnic group” and that “advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of pupils as individuals.” When you try to parse those words, the effect is chilling.

Is it permissible, under the new law, to teach basic history? More than half the students in the Tucson Unified School District are Latino, the great majority of them Mexican-American. The land that is now Arizona once belonged to Mexico. Might teaching that fact “promote resentment” among students of Mexican descent? What about a class that taught students how activists fought to end discrimination against Latinos in Arizona and other Western states? Would that illegally encourage students to resent the way their parents and grandparents were treated?

The legislation has an answer: Mexican-American students, it seems, should not be taught to be proud of their heritage.

This angry anti-Latino spasm in Arizona is only partly about illegal immigration, which has fallen substantially in the past few years. It’s really about fear and denial.

About 30 percent of the state’s population is Latino, and that number continues to rise. This demographic shift has induced culture shock among some Arizonans who see the old Anglo power structure losing control. It is evidently threatening, to some people, that Mexican-Americans would see themselves as a group with common interests and grievances—and even more threatening that they might see themselves as distant heirs to the men and women who lived in Arizona long before the first Anglos arrived.

To counter the threat, solidarity among Mexican-Americans has to be delegitimized. The group itself has to be atomized—has to be taught to see itself as a population of unaffiliated individuals. The social, cultural and historical ties that have united people across the border since long before there was a border must be denied.

Every minority group’s struggle for acceptance is distinctive, but I can’t avoid hearing echoes of the Jim Crow era in the South. Whites went to great lengths to try to keep “agitators” from awakening African-Americans’ sense of pride and injustice. They failed, just as the new Arizona law will fail.

It’s important to distinguish between Arizona officials’ legitimate concerns and their illegitimate ones. The state does have a real problem with illegal immigration, and the federal government has ignored its responsibility to enact comprehensive reform that would make the border more secure. But Arizona is lashing out with measures that will not just punish the undocumented, but also negatively impact Mexican-American citizens whose local roots are generations deep.

The new education law is gratuitous and absurd. Arizona can’t be picked up and moved to the Midwest; it’s next to Mexico. There have always been families and traditions that straddle the two societies, and there always will be. Mexican-Americans are inevitably going to feel proud of who they are and where they came from—even if acknowledging and encouraging such pride in the classroom are against the law.

You know kids. They’ll just learn it in the street.

The Source (http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/outlawing_latinos_heritage_20100513/)

Valin

05-14-2010, 07:59 PM

Did they really need to ban all ethnic studies because of this class? One person teaches a hateful class and all classes should be banned? On that basis, let's just close the schools. And as YOU point out, this isn't an Arizona class.

When I think about Arizona now the image I get is of Jan Brewer armed with a pen. :eek:

Good question, something I was reading this morning....
A Downside of Racial Awareness? (http://www.mindingthecampus.com/forum/2010/05/a_down_side_of_racial_awarenes.html)
Mark Bauerlein
5/13/10

One of the most popular assessment tools in higher education is the National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE), a questionnaire administered each year to some 300,000 first-year and senior students at diverse institutions across the country. It has items on how many books students read, how many papers they write, how often they meet with professors outside of class, and a host of other out-of-class "engagement" queries. One of them goes like this:

Had serious conversations with students of a different race or ethnicity than your own.

Students answer "Never," "Sometimes," "Often," or "Very often," and school administrators, presumably, use the results as a fair measure of racial/ethnic mixing on campus. (The 2009 results may be found here (http://nsse.iub.edu/NSSE_2009_Results/pdf/NSSE_AR_2009.pdf)). To anybody who eschews counting people by skin color, needless to say, the item is somewhat annoying. One senses behind it the social engineer, someone with designs on personal attitudes and behaviors. Obviously, too, it signals a leading intention, namely, to make the number of inter-racial exchanges go up every year.

The fact that if the inter-racial rate for a particular university ever went down it would embarrass school administrators indicates how deeply racial diversity awareness has penetrated campus affairs. Diversity is, of course, the notion of the moment in higher education, the incessant announcements of "diversity-is-our-strength," "we-are-diverse," and so on forming the white noise of campus life. That NSSE makes talking to people of another race a separate measure, and that respondents likely answer the question without blinking, shows just how normal and routine racial counting has become.

For all the approval of diversity thinking, though, it may have a downside precisely for the universities that proclaim it so forcefully. For what if, in raising racial diversity awareness and emphasizing the racial climate of the campus, a university raises sensitivities to racial difference at the same time? If campus counselors, diversity officers, and others administrators lead seminars, training sessions, and orientations that underscore racial elements in social interactions, they might also heighten the perception of racist attitudes in others and the attribution of racist motives to them. Minority students might feel less "acceptance," now and then over-reading negative responses to them as race-based. Administrators want to improve the racial atmosphere in the institutions, but if sensitivities go up along with awareness, then the institution will end up with a lot more cases of race-based allegations than it did before---in other words, a worse racial climate.

This is the dilemma posed in an important essay by Steve Chatman, a researcher at UC-Berkeley, in the Spring 2010 (http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/123327575/issue) issue of New Directions for Institutional Research , edited by Serge Herzog. Entitled "Working with Large-Scale Climate Surveys: Reducing Data Complexity to Gain New Insights," Chatman pulls data from the 2008 University of California Undergraduate Experience Survey that distinguish "interpersonal and diversity skills, campus climate, overall satisfaction and inclusion, and individual characteristics [religion, income, race, etc.]." The data also include the respondents' programs of study, allowing Chatman to break down student perceptions by major.

Here is what he found:

Upper-division area and ethnic studies students rated Climate of Respect for Personal Beliefs at 4.16. Humanities and social science students gave it a substantially higher 4.80, and science, engineering, math, and business students rated it even higher at 5.05. Obviously, field of study affected scores.

Chatman attributes the low climate scores in area and ethnic studies precisely to the instruction students receive in those classes. "Students in area and ethnic studies should have learned to recognize prejudicial communication and should be more sensitive to communication that might be prejudicial," he writes. Whereas a math student might hear a remark and think nothing of it, an African American Studies student might discern prejudice and stereotyping. Does this mean that students in area and ethnic studies are more perceptive and accurate in their assessment of campus climate, or have they acquired in their classes a "warped lens" (Chatman's term) that sees social life in overdone racial categories? Chatman even draws a logical possibility that might appall area and ethnic studies instruction, that is, that the climate in those fields is a lot worse than it is in engineering classes and labs. One wonders how area and ethnic studies professors would feel if they were ordered to undergo diversity sensitivity sessions themselves to try to straighten out their problems.

Chatman draws no policy conclusions, only calling for further research. But his findings certainly challenge the automatic assumption that more diversity sensitivity equals better undergraduate experience. It also introduces a needed critical element in the understanding of diversity itself. The term has acquired so much psycho-political freight that its usefulness for constructive discussion of higher education is practically zero. Such complications as those unveiled by Chatman are not a setback to rational understanding of campus social life. They are an advance.

RichardMZhlubb

05-15-2010, 11:02 AM

I'm all for American ethnic studies so immigrants can assimilate and learn about our culture and history.

What exactly is "our culture"? Stripped of all ethnic influence, you want a class on White Anglo-Saxon culture? Really?

Valin

05-15-2010, 11:20 AM

What exactly is "our culture"? Stripped of all ethnic influence, you want a class on White Anglo-Saxon culture? Really?

Whether people want to admit it or not the underpinnings of the America Republic come from England, and Republican Rome, Ancient Greece, and Jerusalem.

cinnamongirl

05-15-2010, 11:30 AM

Whether people want to admit it or not the underpinnings of the America Republic come from England, and Republican Rome, Ancient Greece, and Jerusalem.

And America was "discovered" by an Italian dude sailing under Spain. If we're going to say "American culture is ONLY England, ancient Rome (but not Italy), ancient Greece (but not real Greece), and a Middle Eastern city (but not those icky ones filled with terrorists)" that's shortchanging all other influences that have been sneaking in since the Vikings found their way over here. What about the French influences on pre-Revolution America? Where do American Indians fit in? Did their influence end after we gave them diseases and learned from them how to celebrate holidays with corn?

Do you really not see the shortsightedness here?

It seems like you're making the pedantic argument that our Constitution was shaped by England and the ancients, but the issue at hand is cultural studies, not American Civics. All of our culture has been imported from elsewhere (no matter how it may have evolved while here), so to make phony distinctions about which ones are acceptable to teach our kids is pretty ridiculous.

RichardMZhlubb

05-15-2010, 11:31 AM

Whether people want to admit it or not the underpinnings of the America Republic come from England, and Republican Rome, Ancient Greece, and Jerusalem.

I'm sorry, but the concept of "American ethnic culture" stripped of all immigrant culture sounds to me like something David Duke dreamed up.

Valin

05-15-2010, 11:41 AM

I'm sorry, but the concept of "American ethnic culture" stripped of all immigrant culture sounds to me like something David Duke dreamed up.

Who said anything about stripping any other cultures?

Why is it that when someone mentions the roots of the American Republic come from England, right away I hear the racism charge brought up?

RichardMZhlubb

05-15-2010, 12:20 PM

Who said anything about stripping any other cultures?

Jim744. He said that we should teach American ethnic studies so immigrants can learn about "our culture," and that they can go back to their native countries if they want to learn about "their ethnic backgrounds."

Laura Cereta

05-16-2010, 03:37 PM

Ethnic Studies Changed My World View-I Love Latinos (http://open.salon.com/blog/idahospud44/2010/05/13/ethnic_studies_changed_my_world_view-i_love_latinos)

While attending Western Washington University a million years ago it was required that we take and pass a class from a list of ethnic studies. I looked over the list and picked Latin American Studies. This single class changed my life and expanded my view of the world.

The professor was a dynamic teacher of this class and sparked my interest in a subject that I would have never been aware of without this requirement. I was thinking about this as I heard about the oasis of stupidity and hate, Arizona, who has banned such classes in their precious state.

Because of taking this beginning class, I became an expert in Latin America. I ended up with a minor in Latin American Studies, became fluent in Spanish and ended up traveling in Mexico, Belize, Guatemala, El Salvador and Costa Rica. I lived as a native Mexican in various parts of the country for ten months. I left Mexico with a deep love for the Mexican people who lived under a corrupt hacienda system that still exists to this day. I was amazed at their work ethic, their humor and love of life against many odds. Continues @ link...

sojourner

05-16-2010, 03:47 PM

The professor was a dynamic teacher of this class and sparked my interest in a subject that I would have never been aware of without this requirement. I was thinking about this as I heard about the oasis of stupidity and hate, Arizona, who has banned such classes in their precious state.

I don't think the bill is directed toward classes like that and they wouldn't be affected by it.

Spang

05-16-2010, 03:50 PM

What are some of the classes that are now banned as a result of this new discriminating law? Kill Whitey 101?

Spang

05-16-2010, 04:50 PM

What are some of the classes that are now banned as a result of this new discriminating law? Kill Whitey 101?

Well, color me surprised, none of you supporters of this discriminating law knows.

samurai007

05-16-2010, 04:54 PM

Well, color me surprised, none of you supporters of this discriminating law knows.

Because it's not the title of the class, it's what is being taught, and how it's taught. Latin America 101 in school A may be a balanced and accurate portrayal of the history and culture of the region and be totally unaffected by the law. Latin America 101 in school B may be a class full of nothing but racist diatribes, grievance politics, radicalization, and hate-mongering, and needs to be shut down or completely overhauled, as it should be.

foxyladi

05-16-2010, 04:58 PM

samurai007

05-21-2010, 12:28 PM

A former teacher in Tuscon speaks out:

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4200332/ethnic-studies-vs-anti-us-rhetoric/?playlist_id=86925

Jim744

05-21-2010, 03:06 PM

What exactly is "our culture"? Stripped of all ethnic influence, you want a class on White Anglo-Saxon culture? Really?

From McClintock's speech to Congress yesterday:

McClintock said it is essential for those who legally emigrate to the United States to assimilate into American culture. He quoted Teddy Roosevelt to back up his point:

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an America, assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on exact equality with everyone else. For it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin.

But this is predicated on this person becoming in every facet an American, and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room but for one flag - the American Flag. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language. And we have room but for one sole loyalty, and that is a loyalty to the American People."

McClintock said there is a movement in our country to "hyphenate Americans, develop linguistic divisions, to assign rights and preferences based on race and ethnicity, and to elevate devotion to foreign ideologies and traditions, while at the same time denigrating American culture, American values, and American founding principles."

Our culture is mainly defined in the Constitution and laws regulating immigration. Assimilation is the best way to describe "our culture", e pluribus unim (from many came one--one UNITED States.)

I am of German ancestry and my great, great grandmother did not speak English when she came here, but she learned and became an AMERICAN.

We still have a few German traditions in our familiy, mostly a few German dishes and a few celebrations (just minor ones).

I couldn't care less how Germans do things. I want and think everyone should be an American first and whatever their ethnic background is second!

I did NOT say stripped of all other cultures. I said they can take college courses. Going back to one's country (for a period of time) to learn in person is an excellent way to learn about cultures or visiting and living for a time in whatever culture you are interested in learning more about. There is also the internet and talking to your ancestors still living and more!

Jim744

05-21-2010, 03:14 PM

Well, color me surprised, none of you supporters of this discriminating law knows.

You yourself admit you are a "fake American" so you have no right to your trite and subversive comments! Almost everyone, including me now, are getting sick of your comments. Try freedom of speech somewhere else!

You should move to whatever country suits you besides the US. I hear Iran and most ME countries hate us so you could try one of those. Maybe you could join the American citizens now imprisoned unjustifiably and outrageously in Iran if you try to speak out there or even just go mountain climbing!%-( [-X

Spang

05-21-2010, 03:18 PM

Try freedom of speech somewhere else!

No thanks, I like it here, you xenophobic-arrogant prick.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 03:37 PM

No thanks, I like it here, you xenophobic-arrogant prick.

I'm so over you! (:|

Spang

05-21-2010, 03:40 PM

I'm so over you! (:|

Good, now leave me alone.

Kbentleyis

05-21-2010, 04:10 PM

Anything for a divisive argument. Please read the bill, or at least the summation by experts?

Oooooo, I forget--it's not in a 5 second soundbite!!

Suzan

05-21-2010, 04:15 PM

Mod Note: Please observe the forum's policy against personal attacks and insults.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 04:21 PM

Because it's not the title of the class, it's what is being taught, and how it's taught. Latin America 101 in school A may be a balanced and accurate portrayal of the history and culture of the region and be totally unaffected by the law. Latin America 101 in school B may be a class full of nothing but racist diatribes, grievance politics, radicalization, and hate-mongering, and needs to be shut down or completely overhauled, as it should be.
So, should we also ban classes for women that teach that women were oppressed by the government and by society and should organize to demand their rights? I can remember taking some of those in college. Should they have been banned as subversive against the government? There was definitely some radicalization going on and probably what you would call hate-mongering, but it made a huge difference in helping women to organize and right a lot of wrongs.

And by the way, we're not talking about illegal immigration here. We're talking about education and classes. What's okay, what isn't.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 04:25 PM

So, should we also ban classes for women that teach that women were oppressed by the government and by society and should organize to demand their rights? I can remember taking some of those in college. Should they have been banned as subversive against the government? There was definitely some radicalization going on and probably what you would call hate-mongering, but it made a huge difference in helping women to organize and right a lot of wrongs.

No! And that is an issue that is generally handled much differently. Violence, subversion and breaking the law are generally (if ever) not taught to women who seek equality.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 04:35 PM

No! And that is an issue that is generally handled much differently. Violence, subversion and breaking the law are generally (if ever) not taught to women who seek equality.
So, this new law only bans ethnic classes that adovcate violence and criminal activity? Do you have evidence of that? If you've going to include subversion, you have a VERY slippery slope. Subversive in who's opinion? Those women's classes I took in college were considered subversive by many.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 05:04 PM

So, should we also ban classes for women that teach that women were oppressed by the government and by society and should organize to demand their rights? I can remember taking some of those in college. Should they have been banned as subversive against the government? There was definitely some radicalization going on and probably what you would call hate-mongering, but it made a huge difference in helping women to organize and right a lot of wrongs.

And by the way, we're not talking about illegal immigration here. We're talking about education and classes. What's okay, what isn't.

If they truly were teaching "radicalization" and "hate-mongering", as you say, then heck yeah, ban them, assuming it was at a public school. Private schools can teach what they want.

Spang

05-21-2010, 05:07 PM

Wait, I thought this law only targeted high school classes. Does it include college courses, too? If so, Arizona colleges and universities are going to lose a ton of money.

RichardMZhlubb

05-21-2010, 05:11 PM

samurai007

05-21-2010, 05:13 PM

Wait, I thought this law only targeted high school classes. Does it include college courses, too? If so, Arizona colleges and universities are going to lose a ton of money.

As far as I know, it affects public schools, K-12. But she asked if I feel it should extend to college and women's classes, and I said yes, if they are hate-mongering AND it's a public university, not a private one.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 05:15 PM

No, it also bans classes that "advocate ethnic solidarity instead of the treatment of people as individuals." That's such a vague standard that I think you could apply it to just about any class designed to make people proud of their ethnic heritage.

Would you still say it was too vague if they were teaching white supremacy and saying "all blacks are this and that", rather than Latino supremacy and "all whites are this and that"?

Jim744

05-21-2010, 05:22 PM

So, this new law only bans ethnic classes that adovcate violence and criminal activity? Do you have evidence of that? If you've going to include subversion, you have a VERY slippery slope. Subversive in who's opinion? Those women's classes I took in college were considered subversive by many.

OK. I don't know what the law only bans. I don't care except to say America first! If a person comes here fleeing their native country, why would they want to carry on the customs they are fleeing from? Knowing your heritage and celebrating it is different than taking hate classes which many have become. Our freedom of speech and assembly can be carried too far.

Advocating the overthrow of the US government by any means is illegal.

If you become an American citizen and want to vote, write your representative, campaign, etc. to try to change things, that's great and that's the way things should be done in this country.

Protests are fine also if you are obeying the law and are a citizen or are here legally.

Ala President Clinton, it depends on what your definition of subversive is and where YOU draw the line but "officially" it would probably be:

Definitions of subversive on the Web:

revolutionist: a radical supporter of political or social revolution
insurgent: in opposition to a civil authority or government
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Subversion refers to an attempt to overthrow structures of authority, including the state. It is an overturning or uprooting. ...
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subversive

subversiveness - treason: disloyalty by virtue of subversive behavior
wordnetweb.princeton.edu/perl/webwn

Spang

05-21-2010, 05:22 PM

But she asked if I feel it should extend to college and women's classes, and I said yes, if they are hate-mongering AND it's a public university, not a private one.

Why do you want the government to tell college students what classes they can and can't take?

samurai007

05-21-2010, 05:28 PM

Why do you want the government to tell college students what classes they can and can't take?

Because I don't believe learning to hate should be worth course credits. That goes for a class taught by and promoting the KKK, radical black supremacists, or La Raza, or any other race, gender, etc for that matter. If you want that stuff, go to a private school that is willing to cater to your tastes... as a private organization, they can do what they want. But our tax dollars shouldn't support the indoctrination of hate.

Amazing that this is even controversial for you...

Spang

05-21-2010, 05:32 PM

Amazing that this is even controversial for you...

Can you name some of these classes that are being taught that sparked this bill to be written and eventually signed into law?

Suzan

05-21-2010, 05:33 PM

If they truly were teaching "radicalization" and "hate-mongering", as you say, then heck yeah, ban them, assuming it was at a public school. Private schools can teach what they want.
See, there's the problem. Your radicalization and hate-mongering would be someone else's addressing inequities and standing up for one's rights. I remember lots of passionate name-calling, including the use of the word pig, as in chauvenist and capitalist, and other subversive anti-government references. Would that be enough to ban the classes or to create a state law to do so?

And yes, it was a public school.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 05:35 PM

Suzan

05-21-2010, 05:41 PM

Because I don't believe learning to hate should be worth course credits. That goes for a class taught by and promoting the KKK, radical black supremacists, or La Raza, or any other race, gender, etc for that matter.

Learning to hate in whose opinion? I didn't feel like I was learning to hate. I felt I was learning my rights, learning about systematic gender oppression, patriachal power structures, misogyny, sexism and abuse against women.

If you want that stuff, go to a private school that is willing to cater to your tastes... as a private organization, they can do what they want. But our tax dollars shouldn't support the indoctrination of hate.

Can you afford to go to a private school? I know I can't, so I wonder what the odds are that most Mexicans can.

Spang

05-21-2010, 05:44 PM

Can you afford to go to a private school? I know I can't, so I wonder what the odds are that most Mexicans can.

If Mexicans want to learn about Mexico they can go back to Mexico to learn that shit! This is America! And in America we should only be teaching American shit, that way our children can grow up to not only be arrogant pricks, but also dumbasses!

Oh wait, I forgot to put a few flags in my post. **==**==**==

Suzan

05-21-2010, 05:50 PM

OK. I don't know what the law only bans. I don't care except to say America first! If a person comes here fleeing their native country, why would they want to carry on the customs they are fleeing from? Knowing your heritage and celebrating it is different than taking hate classes which many have become. Our freedom of speech and assembly can be carried too far.

Okay, I'm not even sure what "America first!" means but it sounds incredibly nationalistic and isolationist to me. And fleeing an oppressive country has nothing to do with one's heritage. How does heritage derive from whatever tyrannical government might be in power? As for customs, I'm sure the goal is not to perpetuate the government's customs, but the ones that are cherished and passed down from generation to generation.

I'm not sure you're thinking very clearly here.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 06:09 PM

Learning to hate in whose opinion? I didn't feel like I was learning to hate. I felt I was learning my rights, learning about systematic gender oppression, patriachal power structures, misogyny, sexism and abuse against women.

Can you afford to go to a private school? I know I can't, so I wonder what the odds are that most Mexicans can.

I know how anyone can freely learn about their own culture if it's primary and sooooo important! STAY IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY! Why do you want to come here???? (rhetorical question with obvious answers(

Spang

05-21-2010, 06:14 PM

If Mexicans want to learn about Mexico they can go back to Mexico to learn that shit! This is America! And in America we should only be teaching American shit, that way our children can grow up to not only be arrogant pricks, but also dumbasses!

Oh wait, I forgot to put a few flags in my post. **==**==**==

Damn, I'm good. :cool:

Suzan

05-21-2010, 06:14 PM

I know how anyone can freely learn about their own culture if it's primary and sooooo important! STAY IN YOUR OWN COUNTRY! Why do you want to come here???? (rhetorical question with obvious answers(
::sigh:: Jim Jim Jim, I'm starting to worry about you. It isn't an either/or proposition. We don't prevent people from learning about their own heritage/culture just because they emigrate to this country.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 06:17 PM

Suzan, I am. Did you hear McClintok's speech and Teddy Roosevelt's quote about assimilating into America.

My parents nor myself had the opportunity (non-availablilty of classes) to learn about our ethnic heritage except to pass it along to a small extent.

But we came here because we wanted to be AMERICANS, not German!

Why do you think the people of Mexico and S. America CAN be oppressed (for that matter anywhere)?

Because they are poor, live in primitive conditions, don't have the structures to be able to advocate for or work for better conditions etc.

AND most of them come here and behave almost identically to their behavior in Mexico, instead of doing it legally, learning English, getting a better education and much more.

They are dragging their sorry *ass customs and ways of doing things along with them and too stupid (except those who are legal and trying to better themselves) to realize the are creating the same oppressive atmosphere and government responses that they are fleeing from in Mexico. And we, who have been here for generations and come from various backgrounds have to suffer for this atmosphere and government stupidity we have going on today!

If you love your country you will stay or assimilate in your new country.

It's simple and maybe it is nationalistic but most countries are that way and it keeps them sovereign and protects their citizens and ways of life!

Why don't we have a worldwide vote and make every country either Mexican, German, Iranian or whatever and we can all agree on everything and be identical all the time?

What is the point of sovereignty or nationalism, pride, etc? We should all be the same and if that means going backwards in time and equality, then so be it. (it is as ridiculous an argument as those who oppose AZ law).

Suzan

05-21-2010, 06:35 PM

Suzan, I am. Did you hear McClintok's speech and Teddy Roosevelt's quote about assimilating into America.

My parents nor myself had the opportunity (non-availablilty of classes) to learn about our ethnic heritage except to pass it along to a small extent.

But we came here because we wanted to be AMERICANS, not German!

Why do you think the people of Mexico and S. America CAN be oppressed (for that matter anywhere)?

Because they are poor, live in primitive conditions, don't have the structures to be able to advocate for or work for better conditions etc.

AND most of them come here and behave almost identically to their behavior in Mexico, instead of doing it legally, learning English, getting a better education and much more.

They are dragging their sorry *ass customs and ways of doing things along with them and too stupid (except those who are legal and trying to better themselves) to realize the are creating the same oppressive atmosphere and government responses that they are fleeing from in Mexico.

I don't even know what to say about the appalling prejudice implied in these statements. How many of these people do you know personally? My experience is exactly the opposite. This thread is about ethnic classes being banned. The Mexicans who want take ethnic classes are in school, getting an education and learning English, clearly. How is that creating the same oppression that exists in Mexico?

If you love your country you will stay or assimilate in your new country. Is everything an either/or proposition in your mind? Surely you realize how narrow that thinking is?

It's simple and maybe it is nationalistic but most countries are that way and it keeps them sovereign and protects their citizens and ways of life![/B]

That's the problem. It's way too simple. Country and heritage aren't the same thing. If there's nothing in your German heritage that you're proud of, then that's sad. Certainly it's your choice to denounce your heritage, but why would you expect everyone to do it? Some of us who are born of immigrants, which would be all of us, are proud of our heritage.

RichardMZhlubb

05-21-2010, 06:55 PM

NoFear

05-21-2010, 07:09 PM

NoFear

05-21-2010, 07:17 PM

Why do you think the people of Mexico and S. America CAN be oppressed (for that matter anywhere)?

Because they are poor, live in primitive conditions, don't have the structures to be able to advocate for or work for better conditions etc.

AND most of them come here and behave almost identically to their behavior in Mexico, instead of doing it legally, learning English, getting a better education and much more.

They are dragging their sorry *ass customs and ways of doing things along with them and too stupid (except those who are legal and trying to better themselves) to realize the are creating the same oppressive atmosphere and government responses that they are fleeing from in Mexico. And we, who have been here for generations and come from various backgrounds have to suffer for this atmosphere and government stupidity we have going on today!

wow, if you aren't racist, you do have some pretty damn racist views

Jim744

05-21-2010, 07:26 PM

wow, if you aren't racist, you do have some pretty damn racist views

Suzan and others, I guess I'm racist according to your misguided interpretation of what racism is!

I am FOR anyone of any origin living here and practicing their customs or culture in their own homes, on their own time as long as they are legal, learn to speak English as a second language and assimilate into AMERICAN culture.

I have lived and traveled in Mexico and S. America. When there, I speak Spanish and TOTALLY respect their customs and ways of life if they are freely choosing it. Most Americans in these countries assimilater FAR MORE into THEIR cultures and customs than illegal immigrants here do to respect the US.

You go right on thinking I'm a racist. That word these days is used so often for so many things, it is meaningless now anyway!

I don't need lectures on this stuff because I've lived it and respect the beliefs of whatever country I'm in (laws too). For that reason I wouldn't go to places like Iran because I'm afraid I couldn't bear being "like their government". Most of the people themselves are very, very nice and hospitable. I know because I used to visit friends quite often in a primarily Iranian area (some engineers at work were Iranian but AMERICANS first!)

Jim744

05-21-2010, 07:40 PM

My kids were born in China and my wife and I try very hard to make sure they learn about their ethnic heritage. They go to (private) Chinese school every Sunday for 2+ hours where they are learning to speak Chinese and learning all about the customs and traditions of China. The local public school system (Montgomery County, MD) also offers an elementary school Chinese immersion program where about half of each day's instruction is in Chinese. We elected to send our kids to the weekend Chinese school instead for a variety of logistical reasons, but I'd be very happy if they extended the immersion program to more schools. I guess Jim744 probably thinks my kids should be doing more to "assimilate," but I love the fact that they have these opportunities to learn so much about their ethnic heritage.

Your kids are not here illegally are they? Why can't their mother teach them about their culture and heritage but in the case of my comments I am speaking about illegal immigrants who refuse/do not learn English and assimilate into our culture.

I have a Japanese American friend whom I went to school with. He and his mother came here right after WWII. His father was a Japanese Kamakazi pilot killed in the war. He refused to speak Japanese to his mother and he only knew a few words of Japanese by the time I met him in Jr. Hi. His mother married a US Army sgt. and she is still living, very Americanized and proud of it. She still decorates her house in Japanese style mostly, visits relatives in Japan and speaks Japanese once in a while. But she's a proud American first!

I guess some can't distinguish the difference between this type thing and being here illegally. I suggest those who think it is racist to want others to assimilate to our culture (and still retain some of theirs in many ways) don't know what they're talking about.

Go live in remote areas/small towns in AZ that are isolated in the desert and see how much you appreciate the Mexican drug lord culture, killings and having to stay in your home, locked down most of the time. In the US!

Talk is fast and easy. Walking the walk isn't!

NoFear

05-21-2010, 07:54 PM

Your kids are not here illegally are they? Why can't their mother teach them about their culture and heritage but in the case of my comments I am speaking about illegal immigrants who refuse/do not learn English and assimilate into our culture.

I have a Japanese American friend whom I went to school with. He and his mother came here right after WWII. His father was a Japanese Kamakazi pilot killed in the war. He refused to speak Japanese to his mother and he only knew a few words of Japanese by the time I met him in Jr. Hi. His mother married a US Army sgt. and she is still living, very Americanized and proud of it. She still decorates her house in Japanese style mostly, visits relatives in Japan and speaks Japanese once in a while. But she's a proud American first!

I guess some can't distinguish the difference between this type thing and being here illegally. I suggest those who think it is racist to want others to assimilate to our culture (and still retain some of theirs in many ways) don't know what they're talking about.

Go live in remote areas/small towns in AZ that are isolated in the desert and see how much you appreciate the Mexican drug lord culture, killings and having to stay in your home, locked down most of the time. In the US!

Talk is fast and easy. Walking the walk isn't!

I think I recall Richard mentioning his kids were adopted.

Anyway, I've lived and traveled all over the world so I really don't need your advice on how other people in other countries live. I'll agree that in many of these places, it is mono cultural and intolerant which is the reason why I don't live there. The USA is supposed to be a beacon of diversity.

If everyone here thought like you, it really wouldn't be any different from these other countries that you speak of.

mack20

05-21-2010, 08:38 PM

Suzan and others, I guess I'm racist according to your misguided interpretation of what racism is!

I am FOR anyone of any origin living here and practicing their customs or culture in their own homes, on their own time as long as they are legal, learn to speak English as a second language and assimilate into AMERICAN culture.

I have lived and traveled in Mexico and S. America. When there, I speak Spanish and TOTALLY respect their customs and ways of life if they are freely choosing it. Most Americans in these countries assimilater FAR MORE into THEIR cultures and customs than illegal immigrants here do to respect the US.

You go right on thinking I'm a racist. That word these days is used so often for so many things, it is meaningless now anyway!

I don't need lectures on this stuff because I've lived it and respect the beliefs of whatever country I'm in (laws too). For that reason I wouldn't go to places like Iran because I'm afraid I couldn't bear being "like their government". Most of the people themselves are very, very nice and hospitable. I know because I used to visit friends quite often in a primarily Iranian area (some engineers at work were Iranian but AMERICANS first!)

I'm not sure I'd go with "racist" but you are most definitely xenophobic in such an obvious way that I'm sort of embarrassed for you.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 08:43 PM

I think I recall Richard mentioning his kids were adopted.

Anyway, I've lived and traveled all over the world so I really don't need your advice on how other people in other countries live. I'll agree that in many of these places, it is mono cultural and intolerant which is the reason why I don't live there. The USA is supposed to be a beacon of diversity.

If everyone here thought like you, it really wouldn't be any different from these other countries that you speak of.

Well 84% approx. of the American public agrees with me for the most part.

Also, why do we need 100 sub cultures in this country? Remembering your heritage and culture is fine if that's what you choose but being an American is primary and foremost in this country.

Every country is unique and has a right to sovereignty and customs, cultures. Diversity is why there are separate nations, borders (enforced), laws (immigration and others).

Breaking the law in the name of diversity is outrageous.

And, Suzan, I'm not, not proud of my German ancestry but I am much, much prouder to be an American. If I were of some other ancestry, I'd feel exactly the same way and if I didn't, I'd emigrate to Germany, for instance.

That's why I don't understand people fleeing their countries and insisting on repeating the same things they are fleeing from there. If America is so great, what is the objection to assimilation in addition to maintaining/retaining your culture to a great extent also?

NoFear

05-21-2010, 08:48 PM

Remembering your heritage and culture is fine if that's what you choose but being an American is primary and foremost in this country.

So what does this even mean? What is "American" ?

Jim744

05-21-2010, 08:50 PM

I'm not sure I'd go with "racist" but you are most definitely xenophobic in such an obvious way that I'm sort of embarrassed for you.

(:|

LOL! Trying to label people is not a form of something similar to racism, intolerance and xenophopia itself? As Spang would say "you people" slay me! You are narrowly interpreting what I'm saying to try to label me and the same is done to some others here I've noticed. Fine.

I know what I am and am not and I think most people who read what I post would disagree with you because they understand I'm very tolerant and supportive of what is LEGAL, regardless of anyone's ancestry, culture, race, etc.

If my ancestors had come here illegally, I would renounce that action also.

Spang

05-21-2010, 08:52 PM

As Spang would say "you people" slay me!(:|

I've never used the term "slay me". Practice your free speech on some other forum, please.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:00 PM

So what does this even mean? What is "American" ?

Ask Teddy Roosevelt. (see his quote about immigration and being American)

Quotable Quotes: Teddy Roosevelt On Assimilation
American Pundit (Free subscription)6 hours ago
Teddy Roosevelt was considered a progressive in his day. In fact, he’s still looked up to by progressives in the present day. He forcible split up large businesses, created the original “Square Deal” that would inspire his cousin’s “New Deal”, made conservation a federal-level issue, and pushed the federal government to further regulate business. In...

Teddy Roosevelt: "No Room in This Country for Hyphenated Americans"
Reaganite Republican Resistance (Free subscription)yesterday

Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:00 PM

I've never used the term "slay me". Practice your free speech on some other forum, please.

"you people"

Spang

05-21-2010, 09:01 PM

"you people"

Practice your free speech somewhere else, please. Get the **** out of here. We don't want your xenophobic bullshit here.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 09:05 PM

See, there's the problem. Your radicalization and hate-mongering would be someone else's addressing inequities and standing up for one's rights. I remember lots of passionate name-calling, including the use of the word pig, as in chauvenist and capitalist, and other subversive anti-government references. Would that be enough to ban the classes or to create a state law to do so?

And yes, it was a public school.

Yes, name calling is over the edge, and if the class was indoctrinating you to hate the govt, capitalism, and men then it should've been closed down. That you enjoyed the class is irrelevant.

But let's get something out of the way first... think of the most extreme, hate-filled, bigoted class you can think of. The teacher wears his KKK robes and hood to class each day. The course has lessons instructing the students in the inhumanity of and hatred towards Jews, Blacks, and others. Mein Kampf is the textbook. The teacher spins it as "instructing students to appreciate their white heritage and stand up for the rights", and his class is very popular among white students on campus, who march in the streets and carry signs of protest against other races and targets pointed out by the teacher. This is a public school, paid for by your tax dollars.

Do you support that teacher's right to teach what and how he wants, and the students to take his class if they want? I'm trying to find out if you agree in theory and we just draw the line differently on less clear-cut cases, or do you completely disagree with my premise?

NoFear

05-21-2010, 09:08 PM

Ask Teddy Roosevelt. (see his quote about immigration and being American)

He's not around but since you're bringing his quote into this, i'd assume you'd know.

NoFear

05-21-2010, 09:12 PM

Well 84% approx. of the American public agrees with me for the most part.

I'm not even talking about this bill anymore. I'm referring to your blatant xenophobic views.

I'd hope 84% of Americans aren't as closed minded as you are.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:17 PM

Practice your free speech somewhere else, please. Get the **** out of here. We don't want your xenophobic bullshit here.

You first! Also, Teddy Roosevelt, a progressive said,

Theodore Roosevelt on Immigrants and being an AMERICAN =D>

"In the first place we should insist that if the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equality with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace, or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming in very fact an American, and nothing but an American...There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American, but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag, which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any foreign flag of a nation to which we are hostile...We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

Theodore Roosevelt 1907

Spang

05-21-2010, 09:18 PM

You first!

So, if I stop posting here you'll stop posting here?

UKSocialist

05-21-2010, 09:18 PM

We don't want your xenophobic bullshit here.

Oh I bet some people here do.

observer21

05-21-2010, 09:22 PM

I think that it is important for Americans, and people in general, to at least recognize that what is taught can have negative effects on the future if they are taught in ways which would encourage unethical behavior. I, personally, also believe that people should learn to value themselves as individuals rather as someone from a certain label or cultural group. But I also believe that learning about that culture is a very important thing, not just for that student's own self-fulfillment, but also for the ways in which it could further shape the United States as a whole.

We're all familiar with the "melting pot" analogy regarding immigration and citizenship. People are believed to drop some aspects of their own culture to become one with the goo inside the pot, yet at the same time add their own cultural elements into it, making it a better product overall. This does not mean that individuals cannot retain most of their prior cultural customs and what-not, but only that the people who immigrate to America from a region, generally speaking, sacrifice some of their former identity in order to become American, while simultaneously influencing the nature of the people in their own way. It's not so much that this way of absorption is enforced, but more likely that it happens naturally.

I feel that people should be free to learn anything they want. Ideally, however, nobody would teach classes which would encourage the subversion of or separation from the United States culture. It is fine to criticize the numerous flaws in American culture and politics under the assumption that learning these flaws can help better the nation. But when it is evident that the aim of a course is not the betterment of the individual or workforce, but rather to worsen existing relations, then I would agree that it would be better if that class did not exist.

Unfortunately, however, I do not think that making laws about it will do anything. This law will most likely either be so exclusive as to hardly do anything and therefore make no change, or be so broad and sweeping that many "good" classes would also be sacrificed. Such is the nature of government. The best solution, I feel, is to somehow encourage a natural assimilation of a thought process which would make attending or teaching such classes as repugnant as possible. Essentially, everyone should just become smarter regarding this stuff.

Practice your free speech somewhere else, please. Get the **** out of here. We don't want your xenophobic bullshit here.

I don't think that's a very productive thing to do. Rather than isolate and outcast those we disagree with, we should instead try with renewed vigor to change their point of view.

Spang

05-21-2010, 09:22 PM

I don't think that's a very productive thing to do. Rather than isolate and outcast those we disagree with, we should instead try with renewed vigor to change their point of view.

I'm mocking him. He posted something similar earlier.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:29 PM

Yes, name calling is over the edge, and if the class was indoctrinating you to hate the govt, capitalism, and men then it should've been closed down. That you enjoyed the class is irrelevant.

But let's get something out of the way first... think of the most extreme, hate-filled, bigoted class you can think of. The teacher wears his KKK robes and hood to class each day. The course has lessons instructing the students in the inhumanity of and hatred towards Jews, Blacks, and others. Mein Kampf is the textbook. The teacher spins it as "instructing students to appreciate their white heritage and stand up for the rights", and his class is very popular among white students on campus, who march in the streets and carry signs of protest against other races and targets pointed out by the teacher. This is a public school, paid for by your tax dollars.

Do you support that teacher's right to teach what and how he wants, and the students to take his class if they want? I'm trying to find out if you agree in theory and we just draw the line differently on less clear-cut cases, or do you completely disagree with my premise?

You didn't ask me, but I wouldn't. I don't support and wouldn't support any classes like this about our country, citizens or other countries.

As evidenced by some comments here about my comments, we have too much hate already in this country to the point of enforcing the law against illegalsis being interpreted as "hate" and wrong by most of those on the left.

I am completely for legal immigration of any person who takes the oath to be an American first.

I am completely for legal immigrants who want to learn their culture and heritage by any means except "ethnic studies" unless we monitor and close any class about any country that is hate filled, etc.

I am completely for legal immigrants and other Americans speaking 20 languages if they want. I admire multi-lingual people. English is primary and first however.

I am completely for following the law and respecting this country if a person is living here.

So, lefties, get off your goofy (being polite) high horses about favoring this country over others in a non-hateful way.

Some of the rhetoric from the left here and elsewhere could be considered anti-American by some.

When you seek to judge someone, look in the mirror first!

Suzan

05-21-2010, 09:30 PM

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:32 PM

We're all familiar with the "melting pot" analogy regarding immigration and citizenship. People are believed to drop some aspects of their own culture to become one with the goo inside the pot, yet at the same time add their own cultural elements into it, making it a better product overall. This does not mean that individuals cannot retain most of their prior cultural customs and what-not, but only that the people who immigrate to America from a region, generally speaking, sacrifice some of their former identity in order to become American, while simultaneously influencing the nature of the people in their own way. It's not so much that this way of absorption is enforced, but more likely that it happens naturally.

Bravo! =D>

Suzan

05-21-2010, 09:35 PM

Yes, name calling is over the edge, and if the class was indoctrinating you to hate the govt, capitalism, and men then it should've been closed down. That you enjoyed the class is irrelevant.

Once again, what do you mean by indoctrinating? The instructor gave us literature to read on the history of oppression of women and we discussed it. Is that indoctrinating hate? It all happened. It's part of the historical record, but wasn't being taught until these women's classes brought it to light. Should that information have been suppressed and people kept uninformed?

If you're for closing down groups that are anti-government, we'd better get rid of the Tea Parties quick.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:39 PM

I'd not only support that class, I'd sign up. I'd want to hear the teacher's reasoning and if I didn't agree, and odds are I wouldn't, I'd dispute his/her reasoning. I think it would be a fascinating class and very revealing of the KKK's utterly flawed moral reasoning.

Oh, that's a little different than supporting the content of the class itself and the "utterly flawed moral reasoning." Would you advocate putting the flawed reasoning into action like many of the hate US classes do? Therein lies the difference. Many attending learn or want to act upon some of the things they hear in these hate classes. You wouldn't. That is the difference and why they should be outlawed and/or closely monitored and shut down if need be.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 09:40 PM

observer21

05-21-2010, 09:43 PM

Once again, what do you mean by indoctrinating? The instructor gave us literature to read on the history of oppression of women and we discussed it. Is that indoctrinating hate? It all happened. It's part of the historical record, but wasn't being taught until these women's classes brought it to light. Should that information have been suppressed and people kept uninformed?

I think it's not so much the material that is taught so much as the world view a class may encourage. Learning about oppression of women, both in the past and in modern times, is fine, and in fact, encouraged (so that we may remedy these errors). But if, hypothetically speaking, the professor supplemented these materials with lectures which encouraged nonproductive solutions (like fostering hatred of men instead of the system all genders are victims of) then I would see that as indoctrination. Not saying that those classes necessarily exist, but that I would see that as an example.

The way I see it, it's a matter of encouraging wrong solutions and thought processes that are emotionally charged.

I'm mocking him. He posted something similar earlier.
I still mean it though. For everyone.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 09:45 PM

You didn't ask me, but I wouldn't. I don't support and wouldn't support any classes like this about our country, citizens or other countries.

As evidenced by some comments here about my comments, we have too much hate already in this country to the point of enforcing the law against illegalsis being interpreted as "hate" and wrong by most of those on the left.

I am completely for legal immigration of any person who takes the oath to be an American first.

I am completely for legal immigrants who want to learn their culture and heritage by any means except "ethnic studies" unless we monitor and close any class about any country that is hate filled, etc.

I am completely for legal immigrants and other Americans speaking 20 languages if they want. I admire multi-lingual people. English is primary and first however.

I am completely for following the law and respecting this country if a person is living here.

So, lefties, get off your goofy (being polite) high horses about favoring this country over others in a non-hateful way.

Some of the rhetoric from the left here and elsewhere could be considered anti-American by some.

When you seek to judge someone, look in the mirror first!

Just to be clear, it's not all ethnic studies classes, and it's not just ethnic studies classes. You can have hate-filled teachers of any subject who turn their class into personal rants each day. I had teachers in Political Science, World Affairs, and even Computer Science (he seldom talked much about computers!) try things like that. And I had ethnic study classes in various subjects that did not ever engage in that kind of stuff. It was the teacher that decided how and what they'd teach.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 09:47 PM

Mod Note: Please, let's have this discussion without calling each other names, okay? We can discuss and disagree without that. No one is forcing anyone to post in the thread. if you object to the views of others, discuss it with them in a civil, respecful manner or go post in one of our other many fascinating threads. Thanks.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:48 PM

Once again, what do you mean by indoctrinating? The instructor gave us literature to read on the history of oppression of women and we discussed it. Is that indoctrinating hate? It all happened. It's part of the historical record, but wasn't being taught until these women's classes brought it to light. Should that information have been suppressed and people kept uninformed?

If you're for closing down groups that are anti-government, we'd better get rid of the Tea Parties quick.

Of course not. Have you actually heard some of these hate classes? If you like Obama, then you have no problem most likely with the Rev. Wright types who mentored him to be pretty much completely anti-American classes (at least anti-half the country, perhaps even more now).

But if you don't like Obama, you are likely to disagree with hate classes and Wright types because you believe in the basic founding principles of this country and pretty much moderate to moderate right values.

Freedom of speech isn't free-for-all speech and in some cases, believe it or not, people are watched or arrested for anti-gov't. things they advocate.

Changing our gov't. through protests, legal means is fine but not overthrowing it entirely which is what a lot advocate.

I don't think "you people" are making that distinction like I and many others are!

But I'm tired of this discussion being about what people believe or don't on such a personal level.

Some of us will just have to agree to disagree. For a while anyway, we are still free to speak out on our reasonable opinions.

Too bad we can't discuss it more theoretically and objectively.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 09:49 PM

Oh, that's a little different than supporting the content of the class itself and the "utterly flawed moral reasoning." Would you advocate putting the flawed reasoning into action like many of the hate US classes do? Therein lies the difference. Many attending learn or want to act upon some of the things they hear in these hate classes. You wouldn't. That is the difference and why they should be outlawed and/or closely monitored and shut down if need be.
Does anyone have any actual proof that these classes are plotting to overthrow the government and recruiting the students? I can't say I ever took a class where they were outright recruiting revolutionaries.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 09:54 PM

Does anyone have any actual proof that these classes are plotting to overthrow the government and recruiting the students? I can't say I ever took a class where they were outright recruiting revolutionaries.
And may I just add that if there are classes like that--and I would need solid proof like transcripts and video--then they and the teacher should be dealt with individually by the school district. It's ridiculous for the state legislature to enact a bill to ban all classes of a certain type. Talk about big intrusive government.

Jim744

05-21-2010, 09:55 PM

So, if I stop posting here you'll stop posting here?

You mean we both stop posting on this forum forever& NOW, not even once in a while? If that's what you mean and we can agree like gentlemen, I absolutely agree. You'd have to keep your promise though and quit coming back after your tantrums.

I've lurked here almost since inception and I can go back to doing that again just fine, spending more time on other forums I've recently deserted.

samurai007

05-21-2010, 09:56 PM

And may I just add that if there are classes like that--and I would need solid proof like transcripts and video--then they and the teacher should be dealt with individually by the school district. It's ridiculous for the state legislature to enact a bill to ban all classes of a certain type. Talk about big intrusive government.

The bill didn't ban all ethnic studies classes. Please read it. It specifically says it doesn't prevent the teaching of ethnic studies, or wrongs committed by America, etc, only hatred.

Suzan

05-21-2010, 10:05 PM

The bill didn't ban all ethnic studies classes. Please read it. It specifically says it doesn't prevent the teaching of ethnic studies, or wrongs committed by America, etc, only hatred.
Banning all ethnic classes that contain hate is even more ridiculous, imo. Who gets to determine what hate is? You and I certainly don't agree on what's appropriate. If there actually are classes fomenting revolution and recruiting students, it should be handled by the school boards, not the state legislature. I repeat, talk about big intrusive government, but I guess that's okay with you when government is enforcing your views?

Jim744

05-21-2010, 10:06 PM

You mean we both stop posting on this forum forever& NOW, not even once in a while? If that's what you mean and we can agree like gentlemen, I absolutely agree. You'd have to keep your promise though and quit coming back after your tantrums.

I've lurked here almost since inception and I can go back to doing that again just fine, spending more time on other forums I've recently deserted.

Come on Spang, take it or leave it. Show people what an honorable person you are since you asked the question about what I meant, I told you and challenged you!

You probably can't do it! Double dog dare you!>:/

Suzan

05-21-2010, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by Spang
So, if I stop posting here you'll stop posting here?

You mean we both stop posting on this forum forever& NOW, not even once in a while? If that's what you mean and we can agree like gentlemen, I absolutely agree. You'd have to keep your promise though and quit coming back after your tantrums.

I've lurked here almost since inception and I can go back to doing that again just fine, spending more time on other forums I've recently deserted.

Jim and Spang, please take this discussion to PMs. It's personal and has nothing to do with the thread topic.

Spang

05-21-2010, 10:10 PM

You mean we both stop posting on this forum forever& NOW, not even once in a while?

Yes. You get one more post to agree, and only one more post. If either one of us posts again, then the agreement is off, and we both get to post again.

mack20

05-21-2010, 10:16 PM

(:|

LOL! Trying to label people is not a form of something similar to racism, intolerance and xenophopia itself? As Spang would say "you people" slay me! You are narrowly interpreting what I'm saying to try to label me and the same is done to some others here I've noticed. Fine.

I know what I am and am not and I think most people who read what I post would disagree with you because they understand I'm very tolerant and supportive of what is LEGAL, regardless of anyone's ancestry, culture, race, etc.

If my ancestors had come here illegally, I would renounce that action also.

So by calling out what you are freely posting as (in our view) being intolerant, xenophobic and racist in turn makes us intolerant, xenophobic and racist by default? My my, that is quite convenient. Best not ever speak up if someone is saying something we find distasteful, because the act of doing so makes us just as bad!

Do you even read what you post before you hit the submit button?

Jim744

05-21-2010, 10:18 PM

Yes. You get one more post to agree, and only one more post. If either one of us posts again, then the agreement is off, and we both get to post again.

Agreed! Suzan wants us to take it to PM's so we can finalize it now if you are also in agreement? One more post for you to agree and then anything else is PM's! OK?

Spang

05-21-2010, 10:20 PM

Agreed! Suzan wants us to take it to PM's so we can finalize it now if you are also in agreement? One more post for you to agree and then anything else is PM's! OK?

Done. Quit posting. This is it.

cinnamongirl

05-21-2010, 11:04 PM

You mean we both stop posting on this forum forever& NOW, not even once in a while? If that's what you mean and we can agree like gentlemen, I absolutely agree. You'd have to keep your promise though and quit coming back after your tantrums.

I've lurked here almost since inception and I can go back to doing that again just fine, spending more time on other forums I've recently deserted.

Do you really want to go down the "coming back after your tantrums" road? Somehow I doubt it.

I hope the mods will intercede on this one, before things get too out of hand.

Laura Cereta

05-21-2010, 11:56 PM

Do you really want to go down the "coming back after your tantrums" road? Somehow I doubt it.

I hope the mods will intercede on this one, before things get too out of hand.

No problem. Suzan has already requested that the discussion of who is and isn't leaving the forum be taken to PM. I'll assume that's been done. If people would like to "throw tantrums," leave, come back, and whatever else, that is their choice as long as it's done in accordance with forum guidelines. Posting is voluntary.

Furthermore, in reading through some of these threads, I've noticed that some of you have a lot to say about Jim's posting style and not much of anything to contribute regarding the original thread topic or anything remotely close to it. For some reason, I don't anticipate that dynamic working out well. I will revive the "posting styles" thread; please feel free to respectfully discuss posting styles there. Let's return this discussion to the AZ law concerning ethnic studies. Thanks. :)

cinnamongirl

05-22-2010, 12:05 AM

No problem. Suzan has already requested that the discussion of who is and isn't leaving the forum be taken to PM. I'll assume that's been done. If people would like to "throw tantrums," leave, come back, and whatever else, that is their choice as long as it's done in accordance with forum guidelines. Posting is voluntary.

Furthermore, in reading through some of these threads, I've noticed that some of you have a lot to say about Jim's posting style and not much of anything to contribute regarding the original thread topic or anything remotely close to it. For some reason, I don't anticipate that dynamic working out well. I will revive the "posting styles" thread; please feel free to respectfully discuss posting styles there. Let's return this discussion to the AZ law concerning ethnic studies. Thanks. :)

Arizona Thread #87 is not going to be productive, especially as long as the totally ludicrous and uniformed suggestions are being made that anyone who doesn't support this legislation is unAmerican.

I think Suzan is exactly right when she brings up the question of who decides what's hate teaching and what's not--but of course, no one ever wants to tackle that one. Much better to try to squash multiculturalism altogether (with big government intervention, which was another good point), and try to justify the discomfort with diversity that way.

Laura Cereta

05-22-2010, 12:16 AM

I think Suzan is exactly right when she brings up the question of who decides what's hate teaching and what's not--but of course, no one ever wants to tackle that one. Much better to try to squash multiculturalism altogether (with big government intervention, which was another good point), and try to justify the discomfort with diversity that way.

That's an interesting point. Do state legislatures sometimes step over their boundaries in making decisions? I think so. I think they have with this particular law and I've seen the FL state legislature over-step boundaries (IMO) repeatedly with legislation. Some of the most irritating to me, are decisions they make contrary to things like current medical and scientific evidence. It's ironic that legislatures can label classes as "hate speech" but based on the Constitution, cannot touch real hate organizations or religious organizations that perpetrate hate and intolerance.

samurai007

05-22-2010, 05:26 AM

That's an interesting point. Do state legislatures sometimes step over their boundaries in making decisions? I think so. I think they have with this particular law and I've seen the FL state legislature over-step boundaries (IMO) repeatedly with legislation. Some of the most irritating to me, are decisions they make contrary to things like current medical and scientific evidence. It's ironic that legislatures can label classes as "hate speech" but based on the Constitution, cannot touch real hate organizations or religious organizations that perpetrate hate and intolerance.

It's not ironic at all. There is a massive difference between what you can say in your home or at a private organization's meetings, and what is taught in public schools, paid for with all our money, and to which students are required to go (unless they can afford private school).

Laura Cereta

05-22-2010, 09:31 AM

It's not ironic at all. There is a massive difference between what you can say in your home or at a private organization's meetings, and what is taught in public schools, paid for with all our money, and to which students are required to go (unless they can afford private school).

You're being too literal. I wasn't suggesting that private organization not retain their 1st Amendment rights or that churches lose their tax exempt statuses. However, it's an illusion to think that our money doesn't indirectly pay for the activities of real hate organizations. Our money pays for the criminal justice system, our money pays legislatures who are influenced by religious orgainzations, and our money pays for the mistakes when society is taught by its institutions to be intolerant.

Laura Cereta

05-22-2010, 11:13 AM

Spang

05-23-2010, 07:55 PM

Can you name some of these classes that are being taught that sparked this bill to be written and eventually signed into law?

Anyone?

cindyb

05-24-2010, 12:33 AM

I just wanted to pop in to say, I have been gone for the last four days to Arizona. I wanted to go and do my part to support the economy of Arizona. Had a wonderful time. Flagstaff was awesome. Sunset Crater and Wupatki Indian Ruins, both National Monuments are awesome.

Went to the Lowell Observatory on Friday night and looked through one of the huge telescopes and saw Saturn. (Lucy, I drove past Drury, probably 6 times)
Lowell Observatory is, "Home of the Expanding Universe" and one of Lowell's astronomers discovered the Planet Pluto at Lowell.

On another note, my last boyfriend was Mexican, we lived together for ten years. He was born in this country but his first language as a child was Spanish. He was from Tucson. I spent a lot of time in Tucson and met all his family. Lovely people. His mother worked for the Tucson Unified School District for years. She and the rest of their family are totally AGAINST ethnic studies. They are also very much against teaching Mexican children in Spanish because they are unable to speak English.

I think the names and labels thrown out in this thread are pretty crummy.

Spang, I see your deal didn't last long there buddy. ;)

Spang

05-24-2010, 12:37 AM

Spang, I see your deal didn't last long there buddy. ;)

Posting was part of the deal. It's not my fault the other person is a ******* moron.

Suzan

05-24-2010, 12:42 AM

Suzan

05-24-2010, 12:44 AM

Posting was part of the deal. It's not my fault the other person is a ******* moron.
Mod Notes: Stop the personal insults. They're against forum policy.

cindyb

05-24-2010, 12:52 AM

Cindy, I think it's a shame your former boyfriend and his family are against ethnic studies. Being aware and proud of our heritage doesn't mean we're not also proud Americans. Those things are not mutually exclusive, but I'm sure they had their reasons.

I'm glad you went to Arizona and had a great time!

They believed in assimilating, learning English and becoming an American. They totally were thrilled to live in this Country and be "Americans." Believe me they didn't hang on to a country that they knew cared nothing for its' citizens.

They were REALLY firm on Mexican kids being taught in English in public schools. My bf's mother thought it was terrible that public schools in Arizona would teach kid's in Spanish. She was right, all it did was retard their growth and limit their potential in this country.

Spang

05-24-2010, 01:00 AM

Mod Notes: Stop the personal insults. They're against forum policy.

We're talking about a person who thinks Mexicans are going to take over the world. Mexicans can't even take over their own goddamn country.

I think we need a sub-forum for conspiracy theories. All conspiracy theories should go in this sub-forum.

Spang

05-24-2010, 01:11 AM

Can you name some of these classes that are being taught that sparked this bill to be written and eventually signed into law?

Seriously, anyone?

Suzan

05-24-2010, 01:15 AM

They believed in assimilating, learning English and becoming an American. They totally were thrilled to live in this Country and be "Americans." Believe me they didn't hang on to a country that they knew cared nothing for its' citizens.
But again, the country of Mexico as it exists today has nothing to do with their Mexican heritage. Just because Mexico doesn't care for its citizens doesn't mean they shouldn't find things to celebrate in their heritage. It's very important that they do. The blood running in their veins is Mexican. You can denounce the country without denying your heritage and you can celebrate your heritage and still be an American. None of these things are mutually exclusive and it's sad that people think they are. Because when they deny their heritage they are denying a vital part of themselves. That sort of thing leads to self-hatred.

If you look at the history of any country on the planet, including this one, you'll find terrible deeds. We took land from the Indians, oppressed blacks and women and now gays, and engaged in slavery. On that basis, should Americans deny their heritage?

They were REALLY firm on Mexican kids being taught in English in public schools. My bf's mother thought it was terrible that public schools in Arizona would teach kid's in Spanish. She was right, all it did was retard their growth and limit their potential in this country.

I don't disagree with this. Of course, the kids should learn English. It doesn't mean they can't also speak Spanish. I wish I could.

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 01:15 AM

We're talking about a person who thinks Mexicans are going to take over the world. Mexicans can't even take over their own goddamn country.

I think we need a sub-forum for conspiracy theories. All conspiracy theories should go in this sub-forum.

Thank you again for your suggestions on how someone else's forum should be run. I assure you that these ideas will be given the highest consideration. The mod warning did not have exceptions; it said "Stop." End of story.

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 01:16 AM

They were REALLY firm on Mexican kids being taught in English in public schools. My bf's mother thought it was terrible that public schools in Arizona would teach kid's in Spanish. She was right, all it did was retard their growth and limit their potential in this country.

Bilingual skills are in high demand in many different fields.

Spang

05-24-2010, 01:18 AM

Thank you again for your suggestions on how someone else's forum should be run.

You're welcome, person who doesn't own this forum.

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 01:22 AM

You're welcome, person who doesn't own this forum.

Excellent point. :) Why don't you PM CGP with these suggestions and use the threads to discuss the thread topics?

Back to the ethnics studies law...

Spang

05-24-2010, 01:24 AM

Excellent point. :) Why don't you PM CGP with these suggestions and use the threads to discuss the thread topics?

I've been discussing this thread topic. No one seems to have an answer to my question, which I've asked three times.

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 01:28 AM

What are some of the classes that are now banned as a result of this new discriminating law?

Don't know.

I've been discussing this thread topic. No one seems to have an answer to my question, which I've asked three times.

I was the first to answer! What do I win? :D

Spang

05-24-2010, 01:37 AM

I was the first to answer! What do I win? :D

This was the question:

Can you name some of these classes that are being taught that sparked this bill to be written and eventually signed into law?

Clearly the supporters of this discriminating law should be able to answer such a question rather elementarily, you would think. But so far, nothing. They don't just make up laws. There's gotta be something that someone doesn't like which sparks a person to write a bill that eventually gets signed into law, or voted down or vetoed. What are the names of these classes which sparked this bill-turned-law? This should be an easy question to answer.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 01:59 AM

This is why I agree with the law and think ethnic solidarity shouldn't be allowed in public schools. Learning about your ethnic bacground in a non threatening way against whites and others is just fine I think!

AZ Bans 'Ethnic Solidarity' Classes
More By Heather Horn on May 12, 2010 1:38pm

cobalt123/Flickr under a CC license Hard on the heels of its divisive anti-illegal immigration law, the state of Arizona has banned "classes that advocate ethnic solidarity," as AP writer Jonathan Cooper reports. The law does allow classes to focus on the histories of individual groups "as long as the course is open to all students and doesn't promote ethnic solidarity or resentment," but the measure has been championed by opponents of particular ethnic studies programs:

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/features/view/feature/AZ-Bans-Ethnic-Solidarity-Classes-1232

Suzan

05-24-2010, 02:54 AM

cobalt123/Flickr under a CC license Hard on the heels of its divisive anti-illegal immigration law, the state of Arizona has banned "classes that advocate ethnic solidarity," as AP writer Jonathan Cooper reports. The law does allow classes to focus on the histories of individual groups "as long as the course is open to all students and doesn't promote ethnic solidarity or resentment," but the measure has been championed by opponents of particular ethnic studies programs:

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the bill for years, said he believes the Tucson school district's Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people.

Once again, imagine if this bill had been written to ban women's studies, which do all of the things mentioned above. My classes definitely promoted gender solidarity and generated resentment against the way women were oppressed. The classes FOCUSED on all the ways in which women were oppressed. That in fact was the point of the classes, to raise awareness and change things on every level.

Should they have been banned? Should today's women's studies be banned?

samurai007

05-24-2010, 03:10 AM

This thread is getting repetitious. Suzan, you already asked if Women's studies should be affected too, and I answered it... remember? And Spang, the Tuscon Ethnic Studies program was cited long ago as the motivation and impetus for this law, though it is not the only program of its kind... not by a longshot. And then when you asked for specific class names, I told you that Latin American Studies 101 might be fine in 1 school and a tan version of the Hitler Youth in another... it depends upon the teacher, not the name of the course.

Suzan

05-24-2010, 03:21 AM

This thread is getting repetitious. Suzan, you already asked if Women's studies should be affected too, and I answered it... remember?

No one's forcing you to read the thread if you find it that tedious. Am I not supposed to take the perfect opportunity provided to me by Jim to compare women's studies to ethnic studies and show how ridiculous it is to ban either? Some messages bear repeating, repeatedly. I may even have to repeat it again. :p

samurai007

05-24-2010, 03:35 AM

No one's forcing you to read the thread if you find it that tedious. Am I not supposed to take the perfect opportunity provided to me by Jim to compare women's studies to ethnic studies and show how ridiculous it is to ban either? Some messages bear repeating, repeatedly. I may even have to repeat it again. :p

I believe you've already admitted that there should be no limit of any kind in teaching hate at public schools... that a KKK teacher in a robe and hood, reading from Mein Kampf and indoctrinating students that blacks and Jews are sub-human is just fine, and you wouldn't mind taking such a class yourself, just for the fun of it.

I'd not only support that class, I'd sign up. I'd want to hear the teacher's reasoning and if I didn't agree, and odds are I wouldn't, I'd dispute his/her reasoning. I think it would be a fascinating class and very revealing of the KKK's utterly flawed moral reasoning.

So, how far would you take it? You seem fine with a class that advocates violence against other races... how about a class that advocates violence against women? Call it Machismo 101, and the teacher instructs the students that "No doesn't really mean no", "if she struggles, she's just being shy, but she really wants it", and "slap her around a little to show her who's boss". Are you ok with your tax dollars funding that class in a public school too?

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 07:13 AM

This was the question:

Lol, yeah, that was the question I thought I was answering.

This thread is getting repetitious.

THAT'S never happened before!

I believe you've already admitted that there should be no limit of any kind in teaching hate at public schools... that a KKK teacher in a robe and hood, reading from Mein Kampf and indoctrinating students that blacks and Jews are sub-human is just fine, and you wouldn't mind taking such a class yourself, just for the fun of it.

Your analogy makes no sense. Last I checked schools had dress codes so I doubt the hooded teacher would get very far. Also, I found Mein Kampf fascinating, yet managed not to become indoctrinated by it.

You're right; let's ban all these classes so people will have to wait to go to college until they hear anything real. For example, grade school education is full of courses of revisionist American History. True American History classes would probably be considered anti-American by some. I think lying to kids is a great idea.

So, how far would you take it? You seem fine with a class that advocates violence against other races... how about a class that advocates violence against women? Call it Machismo 101, and the teacher instructs the students that "No doesn't really mean no", "if she struggles, she's just being shy, but she really wants it", and "slap her around a little to show her who's boss". Are you ok with your tax dollars funding that class in a public school too?

There is a difference between discussing violence and advocating it. Furthermore, violence against women is illegal (Damn indoctrinated humorless, hairylegged, manhating feminists asking for special rights again, like safety! :rolleyes:). Which illegal activities were being taught in these classes? If you're thinking about saying overthrowing the government, reread the Declaration of Independence:

"That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government..."

Spang

05-24-2010, 02:12 PM

My grandfather, who's a retired history teacher, was a member of the KKK while he was teaching.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 02:27 PM

But again, the country of Mexico as it exists today has nothing to do with their Mexican heritage. Just because Mexico doesn't care for its citizens doesn't mean they shouldn't find things to celebrate in their heritage. It's very important that they do. The blood running in their veins is Mexican. You can denounce the country without denying your heritage and you can celebrate your heritage and still be an American. None of these things are mutually exclusive and it's sad that people think they are. Because when they deny their heritage they are denying a vital part of themselves. That sort of thing leads to self-hatred.

If you look at the history of any country on the planet, including this one, you'll find terrible deeds. We took land from the Indians, oppressed blacks and women and now gays, and engaged in slavery. On that basis, should Americans deny their heritage?

I don't disagree with this. Of course, the kids should learn English. It doesn't mean they can't also speak Spanish. I wish I could.

Culture and heritage in a particular country are generally the same thing. Attitudes, actions, etc. help with whatever type atmosphere and culture develops. In this case, corruption. The people learn it and bring it with them to the US for the most part. Not all want to keep this attitude or way of doing things but a significant number do.

Mexico: Corruption = poverty
9:36 am By Jennifer Woodard Maderazo · mexico| society

6 Jul 2007

The practice of “la mordida” — the bribe — is as much a part of Mexican culture as tequila and tortillas. To get by, one makes no bones about slipping that cop a 20 peso bill to let you off for a minor traffic violation. After all, that’s why he stopped you in the first place. And while bribes and corruption seem in and of themselves bad enough, one expert says they are to blame for poverty and lack of economic growth in Mexico:

The culture of tolerance of “mordidas”, bribes and extortion maintains the country in poverty and makes it lose growth and investment opportunities. Families with the lowest income are the ones that feel it the most, and spend up to a quarter of their salaries on bribes when attempting to get goods or services from the State.

This startling revelation comes from the Mexican Secretary of Civil Service, Germán Martínez Cázares, in a speech at the international conference “Ethics in Civil Service and the Battle Against Corruption”, which took place this week in Mexico. Martínez Cázares says that families earning minimum wage are likely to spend up to 24% of their total income on bribes.

Martínez Cázares also says that it’s not just those who enter into bribes who pay the price for corruption — it’s the entire country:

“All Mexicans pay for corruption because the country has a risk tax for foreign investment of 3.08%. This means that when a foreign business invests in Mexico or some entity loans money to the Mexican government, the government, through public resources, must pay the loan back plus 3% interest for the risk implied in investing money in the country. Corruption makes life more expensive.

According to this study (an analysis of the indexes of corruption published by The Economist magazine), the level of corruption translated into a an implicit cost for businesses equivalent to a tax of 15%.”

How can the vicious cycle end? I know that at least in the case of police in Mexico, if you recruit people with limited education in order to pay them as little as possible, it’s pretty much impossible to ask that they not fall into corruption.(My comment--it's pretty much the same in the US--low wages and wanting more "things" makes this type thing pervasive in many Mexican/American (illegal) communities). Perhaps the solution might be to start thinking about ways to provide for civil servants so that they don’t have to go outside the realm of the law to provide for their families.

http://vivirlatino.com/2007/07/06/mexico-corruption-poverty.php

Spang

05-24-2010, 02:59 PM

This woman rocks!

Suzan

05-24-2010, 03:06 PM

Culture and heritage in a particular country are generally the same thing.

I was differentiating between country and heritage, not culture and heritage. If you keep forcing me to repeat myself, Samurai is going to start complaining, lol.

Attitudes, actions, etc. help with whatever type atmosphere and culture develops. In this case, corruption. The people learn it and bring it with them to the US for the most part.

Right, they're corrupting us because it's not like we have any corruption here.

Not all want to keep this attitude or way of doing things but a significant number do.

Could we have proof of this significant number?

Jim744

05-24-2010, 03:07 PM

Once again, imagine if this bill had been written to ban women's studies, which do all of the things mentioned above. My classes definitely promoted gender solidarity and generated resentment against the way women were oppressed. The classes FOCUSED on all the ways in which women were oppressed. That in fact was the point of the classes, to raise awareness and change things on every level.

Should they have been banned? Should today's women's studies be banned?

No worries or imagining. Women's solidarity is much different than ethnic where students are taught the white man oppresses them AND DIFFERENT THINGS SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT IT like the overthrow of the US government.

I don't think women's studies do that, do they? and to me the context of women's solidarity and ethnic solidarity is so much different. Women's solidarity includes all ethnicities which helps promote one voice and for women of different races to bond/band together.

Ethnic solidarity is quite the opposite.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 03:09 PM

This woman rocks! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSppVDbEZkg&feature=player_embedded)

Yeah, that's why she practically got booed off the stage. LOL!

Suzan

05-24-2010, 03:21 PM

No worries or imagining. Women's solidarity is much different than ethnic where students are taught the white man oppresses them AND DIFFERENT THINGS SHOULD BE DONE ABOUT IT like the overthrow of the US government.

I don't think women's studies do that, do they? and to me the context of women's solidarity and ethnic solidarity is so much different. Women's solidarity includes all ethnicities which helps promote one voice and for women of different races to bond/band together.

Ethnic solidarity is quite the opposite.
I don't think we've seen any evidence that these ethnic classes that are plotting to overthrow the government even exist.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 03:22 PM

Updated May 05, 2010

A Legal Immigrant's Take on Arizona's Immigration Law
By Boris Epshteyn

As a legal immigrant, I neither empathize with nor support those who break the law in order to gain admission into the United States of America.

I am a legal immigrant. My family and I emigrated from Russia to New York in 1993. We applied for permission to do so in 1990. Throughout those three years we went through numerous background checks and interviews and we waited patiently to be granted the right to move to America.

My status as a legal immigrant shapes my perspective on the illegal immigration issue in general, and Arizona Immigration Law SB 1070 recently adopted by the state of Arizona in particular. When confronted by critics of this legislation, who have urged me to empathize with illegal immigrants, I draw the following comparison: when a person goes into a bank with a check and receives cash for it, that person follows the legal and proper procedure for obtaining money; however, when a person robs a bank with a gun, that person, too, has received cash, but by way of committing an illegal act. Both individuals leave the bank with money, however, one is a law abiding citizen while the other is a criminal.

As a legal immigrant, I neither empathize with nor support those who break the law in order to gain admission into the United States of America. The background checks and interviews that we experienced as a part of the legal immigration process proved to the American authorities that my family did not harbor a criminal past, communicable diseases or extreme views. Those who skirt the procedures are not only breaking the law by entering the country illegally, they are robbing the United States of the chance to vet them. These illegal aliens disrespect the American rule of law. They disrespect legal immigrants like me who stood in line to come here. And they disrespect all American citizens at large who are kept safe by the immigration rules and processes.

It is counterproductive to denounce the Arizona bill as the left has at every turn. It would be much more constructive to offer Arizona and its citizens an alternative -- something the federal government has failed to do. Arizona's illegal immigration problem manifests itself in overcrowded schools and hospitals, rampant violence and has left Phoenix with the second highest kidnapping rate in the world, right behind Mexico City.

Arizona has exercised its constitutional right to deal with the problem that has bankrupted the state. Polls show that 70 percent of Arizonans and a majority of Americans support the measure.

President Obama has led the charge against Arizona’s new immigration law. He is capitalizing on this divisive issue for political gain by wrongfully painting supporters of the bill as racist.

As president of the United States, it is Mr. Obama's job to protect its citizens. He should not frivolously interfere with states as they deal with the problems that they face, especially those, such as illegal immigration, that federal institutions do not deal with adequately. Speaking both as a legal immigrant and an American citizen, I urge President Obama to put away his political interests. If his opposition to the legislation is truly genuine, then he needs to step up

http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2010/05/05/boris-epshteyn-arizona-immigration-law-sb-obama-america-legal-immigrant/ffer real alternatives to SB 1070..

Jim744

05-24-2010, 03:26 PM

Not all want to keep this attitude or way of doing things but a significant number do.

Could we have proof of this significant number?

Well, in Mexco the attitude is to break the law when you need to or feel justified. So millions come here with the attitude they can break the law and just come here. That's for starters. I will try to find statistics.

But I have much anecdotal evidence that this is generally the case, first hand experience mostly in many areas of the US heavily populated with Mexican illegals.

Lack of being able to find stats on the internet doesn't make it not so.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 03:44 PM

Okey, dokey, for those of you with your head in the sand about what is taught in some of these "ethnic studies" classes, I suggest you write to the candidate in this article who was a proponent of this bill and is running for attorney general. I know this will be poo-pooed and non proof, but I sat in on 2 different "ethnic studies" classes in separate states and this stuff (overthrow) etc., does go on, sometimes subtly and sometimes pretty obious.

But write or email and ask for proof, transcripts, vidieos, etc.

http://www.electtomhorne.com/ (you can contact Tom Horne at this link)

Jonathan J. Cooper, Huffington Post, May 22, 1010

Arizona Gov. Jan Brewer signed a bill targeting a school district’s ethnic studies program on Tuesday, hours after a report by United Nations human rights experts condemned the measure.

State schools chief Tom Horne, who has pushed the measure for years, said a Tucson school district program promotes “ethnic chauvinism” and racial resentment toward whites while segregating students by race.

“It’s just like the old South, and it’s long past time that we prohibited it,” Horne said.

The measure prohibits classes that advocate ethnic solidarity, that are designed primarily for students of a particular race or that promote resentment toward a certain ethnic group. It also prohibits classes that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government.

{snip}

Horne said he believes the Mexican-American studies program teaches Latino students that they are oppressed by white people. Public schools should not be encouraging students to resent a particular race, he said.

{snip}

A Republican running for attorney general, Horne has been trying to restrict the program ever since he learned that Hispanic civil rights activist Dolores Huerta in 2006 told students that “Republicans hate Latinos.”

District officials said the program doesn’t promote resentment, and they believe it would comply with the new law.

About 1,500 students at six high schools in the district are enrolled in the program. Elementary and middle school students also are exposed to the ethnic studies curriculum. The district is 56 percent Hispanic, with nearly 31,000 Latino students.

{snip}

Six UN human rights experts released a statement earlier Tuesday expressing concern about the measure. All people have the right to learn about their own cultural and linguistic heritage, they said.

{snip}

The law doesn’t prohibit classes that teach about the history of a particular ethnic group, as long as the course is open to all students and doesn’t promote ethnic solidarity or resentment.

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/05/arizona_ethnic.php

sojourner

05-24-2010, 03:54 PM

I don't think we've seen any evidence that these ethnic classes that are plotting to overthrow the government even exist.

The measure doesn't prohibit classes that teach about the history of a particular ethnic group, as long as the course is open to all students and doesn't promote ethnic solidarity or resentment.
Why are you against the law? Do you approve of promoting ethnic solidarity?

Jim744

05-24-2010, 04:04 PM

Why are you against the law? Do you approve of promoting ethnic solidarity?

Also those who uninformedly (is that a word?) doubt the existence of ethnic solidarity teachings and disagree with the law can write Tom Horne and as him for proof, transcripts, videos or whatever.

http://www.electtomhorne.com/ (you can contact Tom Horne at this link)

Freedom of Information and not Assumptions!

Spang

05-24-2010, 04:04 PM

http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/2010/05/arizona_ethnic.php

Interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Renaissance_%28magazine%29):

American Renaissance (abbreviated AR or AmRen) is a monthly racialist magazine published by the New Century Foundation. The magazine's founder Jared Taylor has been called a white separatist by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 04:16 PM

PROOF FOR THOSE WHO THINK OVERTHROW IS JUST MADE UP.

Again, write to Tom Horne (links in above posts) to ask to see copies yourself if you like. Info, contained at hyperlinks within post snippet if you go to the link below.

snip

In reality, this law came about when Tom Horne, Superintendent of Public Instruction, Arizona Department of Education (ADE):

related how he learned about the La Raza program at Tucson Unified School District (TUSD). He said he asked to see the materials used in the program, which the district avoided providing at first and ran disparaging editorials and articles about him in local newspapers. He finally obtained the materials, and the primary textbook is called the Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire, a well-known Brazilian Communist. He indicated that this legislation seeks to prohibit the grouping of students by race.

"La Raza" is a Hispanic group that advocates for the violent overthrow of the United States, and has socialist values at its core

snip

There are links to the materials within the article snippet I posted for Suzan and others who demand proof.

http://ww.examiner.com/x-23473-Lexington-Conservative-Examiner~y2010m5d12-La-Raza-philosophy-being-taught-to-Arizona-school-children

YouTube- L.A. Teacher Calls for Mexican Revolt in the U.S.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 04:19 PM

Interesting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Renaissance_%28magazine%29):

Spang I'm sure you love to pick on people but just because I posted that one snippet which HAPPENED to be from that website (which I've never seen or known of before this) does NOT mean I agree with everything else there or with the organizaion. You just don't want to "get it". Do you ever have anything to say about the actual subjec and debate that rather than name calling? On any other forum, you'd be long gone!

mack20

05-24-2010, 04:30 PM

Round and round and round we go....

Jim744

05-24-2010, 04:42 PM

Round and round and round we go....

...without the usuals being able to discuss actual subject matter! It's so obvious some are here to disrupt and be negative!:laughing:

In Defense of Arizona's Ethnic Studies Law

Friday, May 14, 2010

Ariz. Schools Superintendent Tom Horne

This is a rush transcript from "On the Record," May 13, 2010. This copy may not be in its final form and may be updated.

GRETA VAN SUSTEREN, FOX NEWS HOST: Well, it's pretty apparent some people are unglued in Arizona, not just about illegal immigration but also about another new state law that bans certain ethnic studies classes from being taught at public schools. Now, what exactly does this new law do?

Joining us live is Tom Horne, Arizona superintendent of public instruction. Tom, in anticipation of this interview, I took a chance to, you know, look up a little information about you. And I see you have some street cred in terms of your commitment to civil rights. This is not something new to you, is it.

TOM HORNE, ARIZONA SCHOOLS SUPERINTENDENT: No. In the summer of 1963, when I just graduated from high school, I went on the march on Washington, in which Martin Luther King gave his famous speech in which he said we should be judged by the quality of our character, rather than the color of our skin. And that has been among my deepest beliefs my entire life. And so this has made me opposed to dividing students by race.

In the Tucson school district -- this was what led me to introduce this legislation -- they divide the kids up. They've got Raza studies for the Latino kids. Raza means "the race" in Spanish. African-American studies for the African-American kids, Indian studies for the native American kids and Asian studies for the Asian kids. And they're dividing them up just like the old South.

And I believe that what's important about us is what we know, what we can do, what's our character as individuals, not what race we happen to have been born into. And the function of the public schools is to bring in kids from different backgrounds and teach them to treat each other as individuals. And the Tucson district is doing the opposite. They're teaching them to emphasize ethnic solidarity, what I call ethnic chauvinism. And I think that's exactly is the wrong thing to do in the public schools, and that's why I introduced this legislation to give myself the authority to put a stop to it.

Column Archive
In Defense of Arizona's Ethnic Studies Law

Video
Watch the Interview

Show Info
Airs Weekdays at 10 p.m. ET
E-mail the Show: ontherecord@foxnews.com
Greta Van Susteren's Bio
Read the GretaWire
Interview Archive
Greta's Pod Cast
VAN SUSTEREN: All right, now, one of the other things I was curious about is whether this was something you just came up with because -- you know, just came up recently in connection with the new immigration law. And I have a June 11th, 2007, letter -- a 2007 letter -- in which you have an open letter to the citizens of Tucson in which you talk about your philosophy (INAUDIBLE) you say, I believe people are individuals and not exemplars of racial groups, and that you were -- at least, it seems you were distressed that Delores Juerta (ph) told the entire student body when she spoke there that Republicans hate Latinos.

Now, why do you think that this -- the topics or the classes that you seek to ban, or that have been banned -- why do you think they hurt minorities?

HORNE: Well, one of the things that happened was that when Delores Juerta said that, there was a lot of controversy and people told me I should stop schools from having controversial speakers. And I said No, kids learn from controversial speakers, but they need to hear both sides. So I brought down Margaret Garcia Dugan (ph), who's my deputy and who's running for my position now, as I'm running for attorney general. And I brought her down to give a speech because she grew up in an immigrant family and she's also a Republican. And she said, I'm a proud Latina and a proud Republican, and I don't hate myself. And she gave them a very high- quality speech about how they should be skeptical, they should avoid stereotypes.

In the middle of her speech, a group of students that are in the Raza studies program got up, put their fists in the air, turned their back to her. The principal asked them to sit down and listen, and they walked out on their own principal.

These kids I believe did not learn this rude behavior from home. They were taught at home to be polite. They learned this rude behavior from the Raza studies teachers. And it's dysfunctional for them because as adults, they need to learn to deal with disagreement in a civil way. If they think the way to deal with disagreement is by being rude or getting in people's face, they're going to be unsuccessful adults.

So I think this is mostly dysfunctional for the students that are in this Raza studies program being subject to a revolutionary curriculum, a curriculum that tells them that we took Arizona and other states from Mexico and it should go back to them, that tells them that the enemy is capitalism, that they're oppressed and they should be resentful.

These kids' parents and grandparents came to this country, most of them legally, because this is the land of opportunity, and they trust their children to our schools. And we need to teach these children that this is the land of opportunity, and if they work hard, they can achieve anything, and not teach them that they're oppressed.

VAN SUSTEREN: Tom, thank you. And just sort of my reflection -- seems like it's almost a question of tone and inspiration, versus trying to tear things down. It's, like, trying to figure out solutions where we can appreciate a diverse background and get to know each other and enriched from it, rather than try to destroy. But maybe that's my view of it.

HORNE: That's a bull's-eye. That's exactly right, Greta.

VAN SUSTEREN: Tom, thank you. And good luck, sir[/quote}

There is a video of the interview also:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,592863,00.html

mack20

05-24-2010, 04:46 PM

Spang

05-24-2010, 04:48 PM

Remember when Muslims were the most feared group of people in this country? Seems like such a long time ago.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 05:10 PM

I believe that I'm allowed to make an innocuous comment here and there. Trust me, you REALLY don't want me giving my honest opinion on you or this discussion. You're much better off with me holding back and just offering the occasional minor comment.

Cop out because if you and Spang (on this thread) would quit making divisive, diversional comments and contribute something true and tangible to the discussion, it would help. If your opinions are disgusting, then ask yourself why. Can you not read and see that those criticizing AZ laws regarding illegal immigration and ethnic studies are not reading the laws?

The laws do not say what they think they do and are less draconian then fedral or Mexican laws.

Why don't you comment on the video of the teacher advocating the overthrow of the US gov't. or something very similar? Do you agree with him?

mack20

05-24-2010, 05:19 PM

Cop out because if you and Spang (on this thread) would quit making divisive, diversional comments and contribute something true and tangible to the discussion, it would help. If your opinions are disgusting, then ask yourself why. Can you not read and see that those criticizing AZ laws regarding illegal immigration and ethnic studies are not reading the laws?

The laws do not say what they think they do and are less draconian then fedral or Mexican laws.

Why don't you comment on the video of the teacher advocating the overthrow of the US gov't. or something very similar? Do you agree with him?

My comments would not be disgusting, but they would probably require a mod intervention/reminder about how personal attacks are not allowed. Hence, I shall refrain.

And as I've said before, my comments are not divisive in the slightest unless a certain hypothesis that I seem to be getting more and more confirmation about is actually true.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 05:29 PM

My comments would not be disgusting, but they would probably require a mod intervention/reminder about how personal attacks are not allowed. Hence, I shall refrain.

And as I've said before, my comments are not divisive in the slightest unless a certain hypothesis that I seem to be getting more and more confirmation about is actually true.

OK, still a cop out and I don't understand why your comments would have to be such that there'd be a mod intervention.

There are ways to discuss things calmly and rationally.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 06:24 PM

I'm curious if anyone reading this would be agreeable to an all white organizaion called The Race which advocates overthrow of the US government or any government, teaches racial hate, supposed oppression by another race, etc?

Well, La Raza (the race in Spanish) does that regarding the US government and supposed white oppression (hate).

Do you agree or disagree that every ethnic group/organization falls under the same laws as everyone else, anti-discrimination, anti-hate speech, etc.?

'Revolution' one of the R's taught in Tucson

Feb. 16, 2008 04:49 PM

Last in a three-part series.

Augustine Romero, director of Tucson Unified School District's ethnic-studies department, is nothing if not candid about his program.

Traditional history and civics courses, Romero argues, have "been highly ineffective to children of color." He has a better way.

That better way, as presented to students in Romero's increasingly influential program, is, effectively, revolution. Or, if that "R-word" strikes you as too edgy, resistance - a resistance against history and civics as traditionally taught, which Romero considers the product of "ultraconservatives."

"With the ultraconservative orientation, people want to believe that if you offer a naive, simplistic, color-blind orientation, that's the only truth.

"We transcend indoctrination because we offer multiple perspectives. It's a higher level of thinking."

If Romero's words sound politically anchored, they should. Romero happily acknowledges that he and all his instructors are "progressives," and he is contemptuous of teachers who resist admitting that all history instruction is political.

"Our teachers are left-leaning. They are progressives. They're going to have things (in their courses) that conservatives are not going to like," he told me.

"Their concern is that it's not their political orientation. To sit here and say teachers don't walk into the classroom with a political orientation, that's the furthest (thing) from the truth."

Romero is a confident man. Not unlike that self-assured aide-de-camp of Fidel Castro, Ché Guevara, whose romantic portrait has been hung in Romero's ethnic-studies classrooms.

Ché, too, believed the world was divided between progressives and ultraconservative reactionaries, many of whom he imprisoned and shot.

In one of Romero's TUSD classrooms, in fact, a video posted for a time on the Internet Web site YouTube showed at least four separate posters of the beret-capped Ché decorating the classroom walls. And a poster of Pancho Villa. And, yes, one poster of the godfather of the revolution himself, Fidel.

Romero's confidence about his program and its future at TUSD is justified. It is growing rapidly.

The $2.6 million "ethnic studies" program in the Tucson school district is an umbrella program for four separate departments: "raza" (Hispanic) studies, African-American studies, Pan-Asian studies and Native American studies. Raza studies are by far the largest.

At Tucson High School, the department offers 12 separate literature and history courses. Districtwide, it offers 25 course sections in four high schools, all at junior and senior levels. According to Romero, TUSD may offer an "intercultural proficiencies" course next fall to freshmen. And, he adds, it may be a required course.

Romero's program has raised some eyebrows. State Superintendent of Public Instruction Tom Horne, who had a devil of a time even learning about the program's curriculum, has seen the program's texts (at last). He concludes they are steeped in leftist ideology and race-based resentment.

But the real horrors of Romero's program are closer to home.

In the past several weeks, messages have filtered out from teachers and other TUSD employees (some directed to Horne; others who have contacted me, following two previous columns on this subject) about what an officially recognized resentment-based program does to a high school.

In a word, it creates fear.

Teachers and counselors are being called before their school principals and even the district school board and accused of being racists. And with a cadre of self-acknowledged "progressive" political activists in the ethnic-studies department on the hunt, the race transgressors are multiplying.

One school counselor, who wrote to Horne, described an entire counseling department being decried as a racist after one of Romero's activists saw an "innocuous notation" on a draft paper drawn up from a department brain-storming session.

The ethnic-studies teacher "grossly misinterpreted" the notation to have racist meaning, the counselor said. The teacher wrote a letter to the parents of his students "telling them the school's counselors are racist" and encouraged his students to sign the letter.

"I can tell you that the weeks that followed were difficult ones for the counselors," the TUSD school counselor wrote.

"There were many tears. Most of us lost sleep. All of us experienced heightened levels of anxiety. Through no fault of our own, we were being perceived differently by our students and their parents."

Ethnic-studies director Romero points to the confidence his program instills in its students. And, allegedly, the better grades they get, once imbued with his program's "multiple perspectives."

But to every revolution - or, if you must, every resistance to oppressors - there is a dark side. There are victims.

Ché would understand.

http://www.azcentral.com/arizonarepublic/opinions/articles/0216maceachern0217.html

foxyladi

05-24-2010, 06:56 PM

bet they have English classes in Germany:D

Jim744

05-24-2010, 10:05 PM

From post number 150 in this thread:

I'm curious if anyone reading this would be agreeable to an all white organizaion called The Race which advocates overthrow of the US government or any government, teaches racial hate, supposed oppression by another race, etc?

Well, La Raza (the race in Spanish) does that regarding the US government and supposed white oppression (hate).

Do you agree or disagree that every ethnic group/organization falls under the same laws as everyone else, anti-discrimination, anti-hate speech, etc.?

I guess no one wants to touch this question above. To answer my own question, I would be against an all white ethnic studies/solidarity class and a group named The Race (La Raza) being in existence like there is for Mexican Americans.

Alces95

05-24-2010, 10:33 PM

mack20

05-24-2010, 10:36 PM

White news now? Are you f'n kidding me?

Hey CGP? This alright with you?

But Alces - it's totally cool, because Jim just picked the first google link that supported his argument. Him referencing whitenewsnow.com totally doesn't mean that he AGREES with them. He's just getting the info out, yo.

cinnamongirl

05-24-2010, 10:37 PM

From post number 150 in this thread:

I guess no one wants to touch this question above. To answer my own question, I would be against an all white ethnic studies/solidarity class and a group named The Race (La Raza) being in existence like there is for Mexican Americans.

http://www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/us-news/6856-media-ignore-la-raza-immigration-protester-fomenting-violent-revolution.html

Ok, I've just about had it, and I'm sure others have too. Nobody's answering the question because no one wants to dignify conspiracy theory "news" sources with a response.

"WhiteNewsNow"? SERIOUSLY? If you go to the main page of their forum (http://www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/us-news/), you have threads with titles like "What to do with these black people?" and "Why Jews can never be trusted"

Why should anyone take what they have to say about any other ethnic group seriously? If posting that forum as a news source doesn't violate CGP's "no racism" policy, I don't know what does.

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 10:39 PM

White news now? Are you f'n kidding me?

Hey CGP? This alright with you?

CGP isn't here but it's not alright with me.

Jim, we've tried to be gentle with you because you're new, but the racism and xenophobia needs to stop now. This forum is a Discrimination-Free Zone (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=16761). Please familiarize yourself with the forum rules if you haven't already. You said you were a lurker for a long time, so you really should know this stuff. I'm sorry but the grace period is over.

Spang

05-24-2010, 10:46 PM

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/Loompy/normal_BanHim.jpg

mack20

05-24-2010, 10:50 PM

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/Loompy/normal_BanHim.jpg

:laughing:

This cracked me up for some reason.

And Laura - thanks for posting that.

sojourner

05-24-2010, 10:51 PM

CGP isn't here but it's not alright with me.

Jim, we've tried to be gentle with you because you're new, but the racism and xenophobia needs to stop now. This forum is a Discrimination-Free Zone (http://www.commongroundpolitics.net/discussion/showthread.php?t=16761). Please familiarize yourself with the forum rules if you haven't already. You said you were a lurker for a long time, so you really should know this stuff. I'm sorry but the grace period is over.
Did you read the article or are you making your decision based upon the name of the website?

Laura Cereta

05-24-2010, 11:09 PM

Did you read the article or are you making your decision based upon the name of the website?

I made my decision based on many things, such as this:

"WhiteNewsNow"? SERIOUSLY? If you go to the main page of their forum (http://www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/us-news/), you have threads with titles like "What to do with these black people?" and "Why Jews can never be trusted"

And quite frankly, this was not the first racist source used by this poster. Enough is enough and I see no reason to explain it further.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 11:49 PM

Spang

05-24-2010, 11:52 PM

I apologize for using that source which I am unfamiliar with...

The source was White News Now. What the **** did you think it was about, snow?

Jim744

05-24-2010, 11:55 PM

Ok, I've just about had it, and I'm sure others have too. Nobody's answering the question because no one wants to dignify conspiracy theory "news" sources with a response.

"WhiteNewsNow"? SERIOUSLY? If you go to the main page of their forum (http://www.whitenewsnow.com/forums/us-news/), you have threads with titles like "What to do with these black people?" and "Why Jews can never be trusted"

Why should anyone take what they have to say about any other ethnic group seriously? If posting that forum as a news source doesn't violate CGP's "no racism" policy, I don't know what does.

I asked the question before I posed that link and apologized for the link and deleted it.

I guess we better not discuss La Raza either since many of their views are racist or at least against the white race.

There is no way to have an honest discussion so I will drop the subject.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 11:57 PM

The source was White News Now. What the **** did you think it was about, snow?

I did not read the link so I didn't see it was by "white news now". However, black news now, etc. would be just fine like BET, etc. BTW, I did not post the page where quotes were posted by cinnamon girl. I only posted the one page which explained how the media has ignored hate speech and rhetoric about whites.

Sad.

Jim744

05-24-2010, 11:58 PM

I made my decision based on many things, such as this:

And quite frankly, this was not the first racist source used by this poster. Enough is enough and I see no reason to explain it further.

See my post where I apologized.

Spang

05-25-2010, 12:00 AM

I did not read the link so I didn't see it was by "white news now".

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/Loompy/you-lie-2-2.jpg

Jim744

05-25-2010, 12:08 AM

Did you read the article or are you making your decision based upon the name of the website?

No, because I didn't post what cinnamongirl chose to post and I didn't make my decision on this article alone. It's been after years of experience and research, some of it recent. I was just using the article about the media ignoring the La Raza controversy and hate speech as an example of how if someone speaks out against whites, it's basically ignored--no big deal.

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 12:09 AM

sojourner

05-25-2010, 12:21 AM

I apologize for using that source which I am unfamiliar with but I guess no one wants to answer the question about hate groups and it's okay to have some and not others, etc. I will delete my post. I made a mistake.

What about the hate toward other posters on this forum stopping also? I haven't seen the constant name caller threatened like this.

I read the article and thought he brought up some legitimate questions. I didn't see them as racist. Maybe I would have if I had noticed the name of the site and read between the lines. I notice no one attempted to refute his argument and post an example of his racism. It is a discussion forum and the poster is being judged by the company he keeps. I know the feeling.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 12:25 AM

I posted quotes from the overall website, which gives context for particular posts on said website. It's like saying, "But this article on civil rights is completely valid! So what if it comes from the KKK website?"

If you want to provide information on La Raza, I'm sure there are more effective sources to choose, rather than the first Google result that comes up. You chose the link--whether you knew what you were doing or not, I have no idea. If you didn't, great. But please stop suggesting the reaction to the source is my fault, because it's not.

Fair enough but also please don't post something from a website I link (and I will try to be more careful from now on) indicating I agree with the quotes unless they are actually in the portion I post. I don't agree with everything that is said on ANY website more than likely, certainly if I haven't read the whole site. What I actually post is all that I agree with.

And for others, I have posted other info about La Raza and no one seems to care or want to comment. OK, but that apathy or disagreement is what has cost us greatly in this country politically and almost everywhere else.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 12:29 AM

I read the article and thought he brought up some legitimate questions. I didn't see them as racist. Maybe I would have if I had noticed the name of the site and read between the lines. I notice no one attempted to refute his argument and post an example of his racism. It is a discussion forum and the poster is being judged by the company he keeps. I know the feeling.

See my post to cinnamongirl above. I will certainly try to be more careful with my links, but at the same time, I have often said and said again, I do not agree with everything posted on ANY website, only with what I actually posted. Xenophobia and hate seem to only be the domain of white people. Apparently others cannot be guilty of it (on this forum anyway). THAT is what I was trying to point out using La Raza as an example.

But I don't care anymore because apparently there are only a few people here who realize it and others get hysterical. Glad many here aren't jury members! LOL!

cindyb

05-25-2010, 02:15 AM

See my post to cinnamongirl above. I will certainly try to be more careful with my links, but at the same time, I have often said and said again, I do not agree with everything posted on ANY website, only with what I actually posted. Xenophobia and hate seem to only be the domain of white people. Apparently others cannot be guilty of it (on this forum anyway). THAT is what I was trying to point out using La Raza as an example.

But I don't care anymore because apparently there are only a few people here who realize it and others get hysterical. Glad many here aren't jury members! LOL!

Don't worry about it Jim, you apologized, that's good enough for me.

There are many people that buy into that "white guilt" thing. And that is their perogative but I think it goes over the line sometimes.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 03:02 AM

Don't worry about it Jim, you apologized, that's good enough for me.

There are many people that buy into that "white guilt" thing. And that is their perogative but I think it goes over the line sometimes.

Over the line by a LOT. I didn't post the things cinnamongirl found on that website nor do I agree with them. The only thing I agreed with for the most part is what I posted (the quote about the media ignoring what La Raza says about white people). Talk about hyperventilating and over reaction.

From now on, I will likely never post links, just opinion of my own because I'm sure someone can find something on almost every website that they don't like or thinks crosses the line. I didn't say "hey, this is a great website. I agree with everything on it."

People here gripe about censorship but I think it's alive and well here! Policies are also enforced against almost everyone but the one and some friends!

I enjoy the interaction with others here and that's why I decided to post after lurking for so long.

mack20

05-25-2010, 03:04 AM

Over the line by a LOT. I didn't post the things cinnamongirl found on that website nor do I agree with them. The only thing I agreed with for the most part is what I posted (the quote about the media ignoring what La Raza says about white people). Talk about hyperventilating and over reaction.

From now on, I will likely never post links, just opinion of my own because I'm sure someone can find something on almost every website that they don't like or thinks crosses the line. I didn't say "hey, this is a great website. I agree with everything on it."

People here gripe about cencsorship but I think it's alive and well here! Policies are also enforced against almost everyone but the one and some friends!

I enjoy the interaction with others here and that's why I decided to post after lurking for so long.

You know, you might last longer on here if you weren't so damn obvious about it all. A little variety would go a long way with you I think.

(EDIT: Countdown to being called part of a cabal...3...2...)

Jim744

05-25-2010, 03:08 AM

You know, you might last longer on here if you weren't so damn obvious about it all. A little variety would go a long way with you I think.

(EDIT: Countdown to being called part of a cabal...3...2...)

Same with you and a few others here. Variety without name calling, actually addressing the topic and being civil when debating would also be refreshing.

But some special people don't get banned and for that reason they last a long time here to the chagrin of other members apparently.

Move on to name calling, deflection, not addressing the topic or posting anything valuable on other threads. I'm sure those who started them will be thrilled!

mack20

05-25-2010, 03:11 AM

Same with you and a few others here. Variety without name calling, actually addressing the topic and being civil when debating would also be refreshing.

But some special people don't get banned and for that reason they last a long time here to the chagrin of other members apparently.

Move on to name calling, deflection, not addressing the topic or posting anything valuable on other threads. I'm sure those who started them will be thrilled!

Could you provide me with a source where I have called you a name? Other than saying that something you wrote was xenophobic, of course. Speaking of addressing topics, I look forward to your astute analysis of the commencement speeches that I posted in the other thread for your reading pleasure.

Spang

05-25-2010, 03:12 AM

This woman rocks! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qSppVDbEZkg&feature=player_embedded)

Latina professor jeered, threatened for speaking against immigration laws

Professor Sandra Soto, welcome to civil rights notoriety.

Last week, Arizona University's professor of Latina studies took the stage to address 2010 graduates of the school's Social and Behavioral Sciences program. Naturally, her words were timely and touched upon the state's recently passed immigration laws that allow police to question and detain anyone who they suspect of being an illegal immigrant.

Then, she called the measure "the strictest anti-immigrant legislation in the country" that is "explicitly intended to drive undocumented immigrants out of the state."

Her summary, white quite accurate, elicited a wave of boos and insults from the audience.

In a video of her speech published to YouTube, either the camera man or someone close by seems amused at her characterization.

"That's right!" he said. "This is 'merica," leaving out the 'A'. "Cut your hair!"

"...to a whole lot of people, myself included, it appears to not only invite but require the police to engage in racial profiling," she continued, eliciting another wave of boos."

"Bitch!" a man near the camera shouted.

"Before we had a chance to fully get our heads around the implications of either 1070 or of the subsequent boycott, our governor signed HB 2281, which is intended to eliminate any Ethnic Studies classes from public and charter schools in Arizona," Soto said.

"Most people said it was inappropriate for Professor Soto to use the event as a 'political soap box' further highlighting the success of the conservative right in advancing the idea that Universities and institutions of higher education should be depoliticized places where one goes to learn objective truths," commented GLBT Latina blogger Marisol Lebron. "Meanwhile, if you ask me, it's pretty inappropriate for an audience for presumably educated adults to boo a woman of letters."

Inside Higher Ed, an education journal, spoke to Soto after her speech to get her reactions and follow up on the public's response.

"Since the talk, Soto said she has received a barrage of e-mail messages, many of them hateful and some of them potentially threatening," they reported. "Many such messages have also been posted on YouTube and on local Web sites that covered the speech.

"Soto said that she had no regrets about speaking out 'My work is in Chicana cultural studies, so it's my obligation, if I am going to be up on a stage, I feel it is my absolute responsibility to address these issues.'"

The Source (http://rawstory.com/rs/2010/0524/arizona-professor-jeered-threatened-speaking-immigration-law/)

Laura Cereta

05-25-2010, 03:14 AM

Nice tag, Spang. I guess I wasn't clear about the name calling.

Jim and mack, please take the personal discussion to PM. Thanks.

Spang

05-25-2010, 03:14 AM

Nice tag, Spang. I guess I wasn't clear about the name calling.

I made that tag the other day.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 03:18 AM

Could you provide me with a source where I have called you a name? Other than saying that something you wrote was xenophobic, of course. Speaking of addressing topics, I look forward to your astute analysis of the commencement speeches that I posted in the other thread for your reading pleasure.

Calling someone something they are not is name calling. I have repeatedly stated that I am against illegal immigration not a whole race of people. I've also said many other things about respecting their culture and language when living in Mexico or S. America, etc. Funny how that stuff gets overlooked!

I won't discuss things with you anymore due to this. If you make an erroneous comment (call me a name) about me, I think most will know it is hysterics as it is from a few others here.

See, people didn't read the link on the other thread before calling me names and getting a mod involved. They read what cinnamongirl posted which were excerpts from somewhere else on that website. I only posted the one page which contained information I agreed with and thought people should know.

But as I said, I won't be posting links again.

mack20

05-25-2010, 03:21 AM

Nice tag, Spang. I guess I wasn't clear about the name calling.

Jim and mack, please take the personal discussion to PM. Thanks.

Nah, I'll pass on engaging him privately. I've been down that road before. I do find this whole situation more than a bit ridiculous, but Laura, I'll call it quits on this tonight because you asked me to.

samurai007

05-25-2010, 03:22 AM

Over the line by a LOT. I didn't post the things cinnamongirl found on that website nor do I agree with them. The only thing I agreed with for the most part is what I posted (the quote about the media ignoring what La Raza says about white people). Talk about hyperventilating and over reaction.

From now on, I will likely never post links, just opinion of my own because I'm sure someone can find something on almost every website that they don't like or thinks crosses the line. I didn't say "hey, this is a great website. I agree with everything on it."

People here gripe about censorship but I think it's alive and well here! Policies are also enforced against almost everyone but the one and some friends!

I enjoy the interaction with others here and that's why I decided to post after lurking for so long.
Someone ought to dig through the vile trash posted on sites like Huffpo and Daily Kos, so as to impugn anyone who would ever dare link a story from there ever again. Unfortunately, most of us on this side of the aisle actually prefer to debate an issue, rather than attack sources. Plus, I don't have the stomach to sift through sites like that, it's too depressing that so many people are so blind...

Laura Cereta

05-25-2010, 03:24 AM

Nah, I'll pass on engaging him privately. I've been down that road before. I do find this whole situation more than a bit ridiculous, but Laura, I'll call it quits on this tonight because you asked me to.

Thank you! :)

Jim744

05-25-2010, 03:27 AM

Someone ought to dig through the vile trash posted on sites like Huffpo and Daily Kos, so as to impugn anyone who would ever dare link a story from there ever again. Unfortunately, most of us on this side of the aisle actually prefer to debate an issue, rather than attack sources. Plus, I don't have the stomach to sift through sites like that, it's too depressing that so many people are so blind...

Ditto! I posted some links because people wanted proof of hate speech against whites, etc. and this is what I get for it. Won't be posting links anymore I'm pretty sure.

Laura Cereta

05-25-2010, 03:30 AM

Ditto! I posted some links because people wanted proof of hate speech against whites, etc. and this is what I get for it. Won't be posting links anymore I'm pretty sure.

Jim, again--ENOUGH about the source. Please move on, PM someone, whatever. Let's get this thread back on track, okay?

Laura Cereta

05-25-2010, 03:30 AM

Is there a full moon out or something?! :p

cindyb

05-25-2010, 02:32 PM

Someone ought to dig through the vile trash posted on sites like Huffpo and Daily Kos, so as to impugn anyone who would ever dare link a story from there ever again. Unfortunately, most of us on this side of the aisle actually prefer to debate an issue, rather than attack sources. Plus, I don't have the stomach to sift through sites like that, it's too depressing that so many people are so blind...

Don't forget the all-time favorite, "Media Matters". ;)

Jim, again--ENOUGH about the source. Please move on, PM someone, whatever. Let's get this thread back on track, okay?

Forgive me Laura for asking, can we expect the same admonition the next time Spang derails, deflects and absolutely refuses to address the topic of a thread?

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 02:40 PM

Don't forget the all-time favorite, "Media Matters". ;)

Forgive me Laura for asking, can we expect the same admonition the next time Spang derails, deflects and absolutely refuses to address the topic of a thread?

Laura and Suzan admonish Spang all the time when things get out of hand, as they're supposed to. And people deputize themselves to do it constantly as well.

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 02:52 PM

Someone ought to dig through the vile trash posted on sites like Huffpo and Daily Kos, so as to impugn anyone who would ever dare link a story from there ever again. Unfortunately, most of us on this side of the aisle actually prefer to debate an issue, rather than attack sources. Plus, I don't have the stomach to sift through sites like that, it's too depressing that so many people are so blind...

Hardly anyone ever posts from DailyKos here. Even HuffPo is pretty rare. Much closer analogues for the sites you mentioned are TownHall and PowerLine, both of which are posted here more commonly than either HuffPo or DailyKos. And if you truly can't see the difference between political blogs/news aggregators and a forum with a specific anti-racial agenda, I feel sorry for you.

sojourner

05-25-2010, 02:54 PM

Laura and Suzan admonish Spang all the time when things get out of hand, as they're supposed to. And people deputize themselves to do it constantly as well. And have you noticed how effective it is?

cindyb

05-25-2010, 02:57 PM

And have you noticed how effective it is?

lol, I was just going to ask if cinnamongirl thought we could be expecting results anytime soon.

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 03:01 PM

And have you noticed how effective it is?

Then what do you guys think would be gained by additional admonishment? Whining about him didn't work to your satisfaction, shaming him didn't work to your satisfaction, so having Laura and Suzan babysit even more will do...what, exactly? After seeing this thread play out last night, I realized that some people are just going to do what they're going to do, no matter how crazy it is. And Spang, despite the hype, is not more offensive or ridiculous than some of our posters who also go unbanned.

Jobu86

05-25-2010, 03:02 PM

cindyb

05-25-2010, 03:04 PM

They want him banned, that's all. It's pretty obvious.

You are wrong about that Jobu, I do NOT want Spang banned and have never wanted Spang banned. So please, do not answer questions not posed to you.

Spang

05-25-2010, 03:04 PM

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b35/Loompy/towelday.jpg

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 03:06 PM

You are wrong about that Jobu, I do NOT want Spang banned and have never wanted Spang banned. So please, do not answer questions not posed to you.

Then what is it you do want, Cindy?

sojourner

05-25-2010, 03:07 PM

Then what do you guys think would be gained by additional admonishment? Whining didn't work to your satisfaction, shaming him didn't work to your satisfaction, so having Laura and Suzan babysit even more will do...what, exactly?Nothing. Warnings, admonishments, closing threads do nothing and may actually exacerbate the problem by demonstrating there will be no serious repercussions for breaking forum policy. The only thing that works is banning rule breakers.

Jobu86

05-25-2010, 03:08 PM

You are wrong about that Jobu, I do NOT want Spang banned and have never wanted Spang banned. So please, do not answer questions not posed to you.

Okkkkkkkkkkk

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 03:09 PM

Nothing. Warnings, admonishments, closing threads do nothing and may actually exacerbate the problem by demonstrating there will be no serious repercussions for breaking forum policy. The only thing that works is banning rule breakers.

And as we've seen here of late, people just sneak back in with new names and old grudges. This is apparently not a real solution.

sojourner

05-25-2010, 03:18 PM

And as we've seen here of late, people just sneak back in with new names and old grudges. This is apparently not a real solution.
I haven't seen that, but I haven't been looking for it. Banning works. Just keep banning them. They will finally get the message that you are serious.

cindyb

05-25-2010, 03:27 PM

Warnings are Good.
Time Outs are good.
I don't think Spang has done anything bannable, unlike a certain kitty cat that used to be here.
But then it isn't up to me and I'm glad of that.

cindyb

05-25-2010, 03:29 PM

And as we've seen here of late, people just sneak back in with new names and old grudges. This is apparently not a real solution.
You and I both know that could be stopped also, by tracking IP addresses if the mods and CGP felt so inclined.

Spang

05-25-2010, 03:36 PM

You and I both know that could be stopped also, by tracking IP addresses if the mods and CGP felt so inclined.

This particular person isn't getting banned, though. He or she or whatever the **** it is likes to come in here, stir up shit, piss a bunch of people off and then quit posting, only to come back under a new screen name and do it all over again.

LadyLazarus

05-25-2010, 03:54 PM

And as we've seen here of late, people just sneak back in with new names and old grudges. This is apparently not a real solution.

First, why is this such a problem for you? Who cares if people are doing that? I honestly don't know why some of you keep harping on this same tired-ass issue over and over again. We are all anonymous here and there is no reason to assume any of us is who we say we are and everybody is dissimulating here, so this makes absolutely no sense to me. It demonstrates an astonishing level of naivete or ignorance about how online networks actually work. The whole point is to be anybody but who you actually are, so your desire to continually try to ferret out a poster who wishes to participate while remaining anonymous is just plain bizarre.

Second, the poster you refer to wasn't banned, so I hardly think "sneaking" is the correct word for what this poster does. Are we all required to use the same userid or handle? Why? Who makes up these retarded rules? Are we all sneaking because we go by fake usernames and handles? Or do you consider only individuals who use multiple handles to be "sneaking"? And given that we all always know who this poster actually is, no matter what handle she goes by, I hardly think this fits the definition of sneaking.

Third, you seem to be the one with the serious grudge against this poster. No matter what thread she posts in or what she posts, you always have something negative to say about it, even when it's not inflammatory or "racist." In fact, I've never seen so many people go after a single, harmless poster before on this board. I'm starting to wonder if you are all just getting obsessed with this issue.

And yes, if you haven't figured it out by now, I'm trying to prevent another meltdown from occurring, where moderators have to actually spend their whole day dealing with a crisis because some of you still can't quite figure out when someone else has had enough.

(And before we lay recourse to "racist" posts, I would like to note that many posters on this board post much more inflammatory material than what I saw in the Arizona Bill thread and nobody goes after them the way you do this poster. There is clearly a special set of rules that applies to this poster with you people. If a post is "racist," then it is against the rules, and you should privately report it to the moderators, not engage in this bullshit showdown with the same poster ad nauseam. If she bothers you that much, put her on ignore and be done with it already.)

cinnamongirl

05-25-2010, 04:11 PM

First, why is this such a problem for you? Who cares if people are doing that? I honestly don't know why some of you keep harping on this same tired-ass issue over and over again. We are all anonymous here and there is no reason to assume any of us is who we say we are and everybody is dissimulating here, so this makes absolutely no sense to me. It demonstrates an astonishing level of naivete or ignorance about how online networks actually work. The whole point is to be anybody but who you actually are, so your desire to continually try to ferret out a poster who wishes to participate while remaining anonymous is just plain bizarre.

Second, the poster you refer to wasn't banned, so I hardly think "sneaking" is the correct word for what this poster does. Are we all required to use the same userid or handle? Why? Who makes up these retarded rules? Are we all sneaking because we go by fake usernames and handles? Or do you consider only individuals who use multiple handles to be "sneaking"? And given that we all always know who this poster actually is, no matter what handle she goes by, I hardly think this fits the definition of sneaking.

Third, you seem to be the one with the serious grudge against this poster. No matter what thread she posts in or what she posts, you always have something negative to say about it, even when it's not inflammatory or "racist." In fact, I've never seen so many people go after a single, harmless poster before on this board. I'm starting to wonder if you are all just getting obsessed with this issue.

And yes, if you haven't figured it out by now, I'm trying to prevent another meltdown from occurring, where moderators have to actually spend their whole day dealing with a crisis because some of you still can't quite figure out when someone else has had enough.

(And before we lay recourse to "racist" posts, I would like to note that many posters on this board post much more inflammatory material than what I saw in the Arizona Bill thread and nobody goes after them the way you do this poster. There is clearly a special set of rules that applies to this poster with you people. If a post is "racist," then it is against the rules, and you should privately report it to the moderators, not engage in this bullshit showdown with the same poster ad nauseam. If she bothers you that much, put her on ignore and be done with it already.)

You mean the way you quietly sit by when people post sexist things? Honestly, this is a little difficult to take from you. As far as I'm concerned, liabilities should be minimized--and no one seemed to be doing anything about the increasing racial rhetoric in this case. Maybe this will calm down on its own, but it's not like I'm the only problem here. I'm done posting on this issue, because you're right that I let annoyance and disgust get the best of me, but lecturing me won't actually solve anything.

LadyLazarus

05-25-2010, 04:26 PM

You mean the way you quietly sit by when people post sexist things? Honestly, this is a little difficult to take from you. As far as I'm concerned, liabilities should be removed--and no one seemed to be doing anything about it.

Believe me, I am just as disgusted by what that poster posted as you are, but commenting that a post is sexist or racist is totally different than what's been going on here between you and this poster. (I didn't get to the thread in time, but if I had, I would have told her to stop posting that sick racist crap.)

I often comment that a post is sexist, but I never call for a poster to be banned from this forum or tattle on them or make constant snarky comments every time they post something; I actually try to engage in a dialogue with the poster about it. Even with Tao, whom I actually liked quite a bit, or TC, who was a raging sexist, I never engaged in a protracted war. In fact, I found TC so noxious that I literally put him on ignore after our first altercation, and never read another thing he wrote. I did the same thing for the guy who actually posted images of his daughter standing over a bleeding and dying deer she had just shot. TC kept trying to re-engage me, but I wouldn't take the bait.

But with you and this poster, it's become some kind of permanent war that never seems to end with each side holding a grudge and then saying it's the other person whose actually holding the grudge. You strike me as a very smart and savvy individual, so I am just not getting why you are even engaging with this person. None of it makes any sense to me.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 07:42 PM

Laura or Suzan asked me to stop talking about the posting of that website, etc. but everyone else seems to be able to so I will say for the last time:

Just because I post a link to something doesn't mean I agree with everything on that website (cinnamongirl went looking for something and found racist comments on the site elsewhere AND POSTED them. I did not.) I also vehemently disagree with what she posted from the website trying to make me look racist. All I am doing in some of my post is show that racism, discrimination or whatever you want to call it can go both ways.

I don't have time to play amateur detective and look through every single webiste. Since I personally am not monolithic, I do happen to be able to agree with SOME things said on a website and not agree with most everything else.

That seems to be the point most people are missing.

Alos, as LL says, there is a lot of "pretend" that goes on on the internet and we are all mostly anonymous. I have NO idea (except for yourself) if you are telling the truth, half of the truth, none of the truth, etc.

And who should care? We don't personally physically know each other. I suspect several people on here aren't who they say or pretend to be but I don't go looking for reasons to try to get them banned or placed in an unfavorable light.

I doubt I'll be posting very many links and I think it'd be fun to go through everyone else's (who do the same to me) and find bad things or nit pick other things on the site which weren't meant to be part of the discussion.

I guess no one has anything more to say on the post topic? I certainly don't.

Spang

05-25-2010, 08:18 PM

(No Nudity)

samurai007

05-25-2010, 09:37 PM

(No Nudity) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLgUVL3rdg8&feature=player_embedded)

Now, this is something I have real experience in. One of the reasons Japan hires 5000 native English speakers to teach English in their public schools each year is to properly model pronunciation and teach real-world grammar and phrasing. The Japanese teachers of English can and do teach how to conjugate verbs and proper sentence structure and things like that, but many have accents so heavy that they can't really model pronunciation, and inflections or where to put stress in a sentence come naturally from native speakers. Now, the JET Program hires people from every English speaking country... America, England, Australia, New Zealand, Scotland, Canada, etc. So there are a wide variety of accents from one JET to another. The point isn't that there is only 1 correct way to say something in English... there isn't. But native speakers of a language will simply be more fluid, more natural, than someone who learned it as a 2nd language.

My dad has a very heavy accent... people often have a hard time understanding him. IMO, he would not make a very good English teacher (though he may do well in some other subjects... he used to teach woodshop back in Hungary and he was a professional cabinet maker).

Also, I had a few teachers with very heavy accents. I was lucky to understand even half of what one Indian professor of Modern History said in his 3 hour lectures. After class, a group of us students would meet to compare notes and see if someone else caught something the others had missed. He was one of the few teachers I had whose accent was so severe, it really hampered the teaching of his students. It was far, far heavier than those presented in that video... I could understand them no problem.

LadyLazarus

05-25-2010, 10:21 PM

(No Nudity) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLgUVL3rdg8&feature=player_embedded)

Sorry but this bugs me, especially this ridiculous notion that non-native speakers are better English teachers. I cannot tell you how many students come to my office hours literally complaining because one of their teachers--in any subject I might add --speaks English so poorly and with such a heavy accent that they literally can't understand lectures and/or that it is compromising their ability to learn material. This is taking political correctness to ridiculous degrees. Seriously, if you're going to teach English, be able to pronounce words at least correctly enough that those you are teaching understand what you are saying.

It reminds me of when I was taught French by a non-native speaker and was later told by a French teacher who was a native speaker that I was pronouncing tons of French words wrong.

There were moments in this video when I had trouble understanding what this woman was saying, so I can only imagine the effect it's having on her students. If she were teaching comparative literature, it would at least make a lot more sense. But basic English? Come on. It's like having the blind lead the blind.

Jim744

05-25-2010, 10:31 PM

Sorry but this bugs me, especially this ridiculous notion that non-native speakers are better English teachers. I cannot tell you how many students come to my office hours literally complaining because one of their teachers--in any subject I might add --speaks English so poorly and with such a heavy accent that they literally can't understand lectures and/or that it is compromising their ability to learn material. This is taking political correctness to ridiculous degrees. Seriously, if you're going to teach English, be able to pronounce words at least correctly enough that those you are teaching understand what you are saying.

It reminds me of when I was taught French by a non-native speaker and was later told by a French teacher who was a native speaker that I was pronouncing tons of French words wrong.

There were moments in this video when I had trouble understanding what this woman was saying, so I can only imagine the effect it's having on her students. If she were teaching comparative literature, it would at least make a lot more sense. But basic English? Come on. It's like having the blind lead the blind.

I had a college prof for history who was so hard to understand, I and several others dropped the class. We were afraid our grades would not be so great because we could understand little.

Spang

05-26-2010, 12:45 AM

My grandfather, who's a retired history teacher, was a member of the KKK while he was teaching.

He told one of his classes on a Friday before it let out that he was a member of the KKK. One of his students wasn't too thrilled about this. He said they'd talk about it on Monday. Monday came around and he let his students know that he was a member of Kappa Kappa Kappa.

Suzan

05-26-2010, 02:33 AM

So, that's where you get it from. Grampa. :D

hillary4change

05-26-2010, 03:42 AM

Thank You, LL for bringing some common sense to this crazy attack! I was reading this thread last night. I wanted to comment on the viciousness of the posts, but I had to go. So I am glad that you did.

First, why is this such a problem for you? Who cares if people are doing that? I honestly don't know why some of you keep harping on this same tired-ass issue over and over again. We are all anonymous here and there is no reason to assume any of us is who we say we are and everybody is dissimulating here, so this makes absolutely no sense to me. It demonstrates an astonishing level of naivete or ignorance about how online networks actually work. The whole point is to be anybody but who you actually are, so your desire to continually try to ferret out a poster who wishes to participate while remaining anonymous is just plain bizarre.

Second, the poster you refer to wasn't banned, so I hardly think "sneaking" is the correct word for what this poster does. Are we all required to use the same userid or handle? Why? Who makes up these retarded rules? Are we all sneaking because we go by fake usernames and handles? Or do you consider only individuals who use multiple handles to be "sneaking"? And given that we all always know who this poster actually is, no matter what handle she goes by, I hardly think this fits the definition of sneaking.

Third, you seem to be the one with the serious grudge against this poster. No matter what thread she posts in or what she posts, you always have something negative to say about it, even when it's not inflammatory or "racist." In fact, I've never seen so many people go after a single, harmless poster before on this board. I'm starting to wonder if you are all just getting obsessed with this issue.

And yes, if you haven't figured it out by now, I'm trying to prevent another meltdown from occurring, where moderators have to actually spend their whole day dealing with a crisis because some of you still can't quite figure out when someone else has had enough.

(And before we lay recourse to "racist" posts, I would like to note that many posters on this board post much more inflammatory material than what I saw in the Arizona Bill thread and nobody goes after them the way you do this poster. There is clearly a special set of rules that applies to this poster with you people. If a post is "racist," then it is against the rules, and you should privately report it to the moderators, not engage in this bullshit showdown with the same poster ad nauseam. If she bothers you that much, put her on ignore and be done with it already.)

This sounds like a common sense approach to what could have been an F in a class you otherwise may have mastered.

Some here may think this was racist of you, I think it was a brilliant answer, why complain when it will do no good and you will still fail, at least this way you were in control of your grade and ultimately your destiny!

I had a college prof for history who was so hard to understand, I and several others dropped the class. We were afraid our grades would not be so great because we could understand little.

Foggy

05-26-2010, 07:05 AM

I'm flying to Phoenix on Saturday morning for the First Nationable Gathering of the Anti-Birthers From Heck.

If the cops approach me and say "papers" and I say "scissors," do I win? @};-

cinnamongirl

05-26-2010, 03:11 PM

Believe me, I am just as disgusted by what that poster posted as you are, but commenting that a post is sexist or racist is totally different than what's been going on here between you and this poster. (I didn't get to the thread in time, but if I had, I would have told her to stop posting that sick racist crap.)

I often comment that a post is sexist, but I never call for a poster to be banned from this forum or tattle on them or make constant snarky comments every time they post something; I actually try to engage in a dialogue with the poster about it. Even with Tao, whom I actually liked quite a bit, or TC, who was a raging sexist, I never engaged in a protracted war. In fact, I found TC so noxious that I literally put him on ignore after our first altercation, and never read another thing he wrote. I did the same thing for the guy who actually posted images of his daughter standing over a bleeding and dying deer she had just shot. TC kept trying to re-engage me, but I wouldn't take the bait.

But with you and this poster, it's become some kind of permanent war that never seems to end with each side holding a grudge and then saying it's the other person whose actually holding the grudge. You strike me as a very smart and savvy individual, so I am just not getting why you are even engaging with this person. None of it makes any sense to me.

I understand your points, and I probably could have handled things differently, but I think you're undercutting the concerns that I have in this case overall.

This thread has clearly gotten way out of hand, and I hesitated to add to it, but everyone else seems to be putting in their last word, so...yeah. Making me the lightning rod here is not a complete picture of what's really going on.