calfoxwc Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Fascism is rearing it's ugly head in the American Congress and White House. guess whose fault it is. Yep. the leftists, revolutionary, anti-American Democratic party. **************** Obama To Take Over Control of College Textbooks? by Warner Todd Huston Candace de Russy over at National Review posted an alarming example of an Obama power grab. Or perhaps more precisely it’s yet another alarming example of an Obama power grab. This time Obama apparently is setting the table to take control of what is printed in our nation’s college textbooks. This one slipped past my radar in August of 2009, but apparently Barack Obama signed the Federal Textbook Act (Download .pdf file) that made provisions for the federal government to take control of the pricing and availability of the text books in our institutions of higher learning (at least the ones that take federal funding). According to the language of the act, it is all about keeping textbooks affordable for students. Purpose and Intent- The purpose of this section is to ensure that students have access to affordable course materials by decreasing costs to students and enhancing transparency and disclosure with respect to the selection, purchase, sale, and use of course materials. It is the intent of this section to encourage all of the involved parties, including faculty, students, administrators, institutions of higher education, bookstores, distributors, and publishers, to work together to identify ways to decrease the cost of college textbooks and supplemental materials for students while supporting the academic freedom of faculty members to select high quality course materials for students. Sounds good, right? Maybe not so much. National Review quotes George Mason economics professor Donald J. Boudreaux as saying that this act seems to be “a first step toward federal oversight of the contents of college textbooks.” As proof he points specifically to section C, the publisher requirements section. © A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any. Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it? Of course, we all know that once government gets its tendrils into your business it takes all power away from you and reassigns it to government. So, once this act is implemented, any federal money involved will give government the opening to begin controlling everything in the process of creating and distributing college textbooks. As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed. Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood. I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about. This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 meh. Section C sounds to me like it was meant to prevent publishers from coming out with new "editions" of textbooks that are only different from the previous edition by a changed word here and there. Trust me, they do it al lthe time. From my education in civil engineering, and now my present education path in medicine, I can attest to the practice. They come out with new editions only because they want people to buy new books instead of people buying used books from other students who have taken the class already. And then they charge ungodly amounts for the new books. My Anatomy and Physiology book costed $160 USED because it was the current edition. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Oops. Replied to the wrong thread. Hey it's only slight revisions. George Washington Carver threw a silver dollar across the Potomac.... WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 But there's no allocation for the government controlling what is in text books. They only want to know what the difference between the new edition and old editions are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 As prof Boudreaux points out, if people are upset over the recent newfound control that the conservative leaning Texas textbook commission had over new textbooks, then how upset might they be if the federal government takes over our college textbooks? There should be no difference at all in the reaction if it was really government control that was being opposed. Naturally, its always about whose ox is being gored with liberals. Texas textbook control: baaaaad. Obama textbook control: gooooood. This is different. The Texas textbooks are being made with a Christian agenda, focusing on people like John Calvin and St. Thomas Aquinas over people like Jefferson. That is my problem with the books, they don't seem very objective. I would also point out one other thing. Many professors in our nation’s colleges and universities have hit the lottery by writing textbooks for their own classes, books that their university will then adopt as the “official” textbook for class work. These professors make a tidy sum of money on these expensive, small print run books that their captive student audience is forced to buy. It would seem to me that this Federal Textbook Act could easily eliminate this lucrative but under-the-radar source of income for professors everywhere. Not that I am against that, but it is something for those lefty profs that so love their Obammessiah to think about. All of my professors that make their own textbooks make diddly squat from them, they'd just post the chapters online. It's not that lucrative, in my experience, and I don't see how this policy would stop them from using their own texts. This bill was originally signed in 2008 by President Bush and was introduced by Illinois Senator Dick Durbin. It took effect this year during Obama’s presidency. But regardless of who signed it — and this shows that Bush was as bad as Obama for his love of big government — it is a bad idea to allow the federal government to get involved in the production of text books. Like someone else brought up, they're helping to make the whole situation less of a scam. There's nothing worse than having to pay $175 for a textbook, then not being able to make any money off of it when you're done because they change the cover picture and switch the order of chapters for a new edition. I've personally turned to piracy to get many of my textbooks. I just don't have the money necessary to buy 600-1000 dollars worth of books every semester. If, however, it's used for government controlling the content of the books, then that's a problem. If books were to get changed to have some sort of subjective agenda, you know the academic community would attack it (as they did the Texas books). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 31, 2010 Author Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 © A description of the substantial content revisions made between the current edition of the college textbook or supplemental material and the previous edition, if any. Why does Obama’s overlords need to know what revisions have been made to a textbook? This act is supposed to be concerned with pricing and availability, not content… isn’t it? **************** I know textbooks are a scam, it's ridiculous. I don't know what the professors got from their books... but the except ***given that Obama songs are played in schools, and Obamao isn't all that interested in Americanism, isn't happy that our Supreme Court gets to disagree with him and isn't happy with our Constitution....., and wants to "change the face of "America"... and David Axlerod used to write articles in a communist paper in college and came from a communist leaning family, and Bloom says it's right that power comes from the barrel of a gun, and another of his cronies has MAO as one of her favorite philosophers, and another believes that capitalism must go, and another .... yeah. Kinda like that. "Change just a word" ??? Don't bet on it. Look at the struggle Texas had over MAJOR content of the books there. The socialist/progressives/communist leaning libs in our government intent to see how far they can get. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Don't bet on it. Look at the struggle Texas had over MAJOR content of the books there. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/13/education/13texas.html There are seven members of the conservative bloc on the board, but they are often joined by one of the other three Republicans on crucial votes. There were no historians, sociologists or economists consulted at the meetings, though some members of the conservative bloc held themselves out as experts on certain topics. The conservative members maintain that they are trying to correct what they see as a liberal bias among the teachers who proposed the curriculum. To that end, they made dozens of minor changes aimed at calling into question, among other things, concepts like the separation of church and state and the secular nature of the American Revolution. “I reject the notion by the left of a constitutional separation of church and state,” said David Bradley, a conservative from Beaumont who works in real estate. “I have $1,000 for the charity of your choice if you can find it in the Constitution." This is my problem with it. They're changing shit without any historical or scientific backing, it's being changed for no reason than to further their agenda. If the Obama administration were to do the same thing for its own purposes, academia would be on it like white on rice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Another reason to get your kids out of public schools. If you love and want the best for your children get them into a private school, where they can learn and prepare for life and not have to be subjected to fruitcake government programs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 31, 2010 Report Share Posted March 31, 2010 Another reason to get your kids out of public schools. If you love and want the best for your children get them into a private school, where they can learn and prepare for life and not have to be subjected to fruitcake government programs. Yes, forgo government indoctrination for religious indoctrination. That's much better! That being said, I've gone to private schools all my life, but most of the textbooks at my high school were piggybacked off of the public school. The education is the same no matter where you go, unless you live in a very shitty area. I'm going to U. of Dayton right now, but the education I could receive here isn't any different than what I'd get at OSU. The only real differences between schools are the demographics and majors offered. Unless you're going to an elite private school (Iggy's or Ed's), it doesn't matter what high school you went to (There was zero difference between Lake Catholic and Mentor). Likewise, unless you're at MIT, a BS in physics is a BS in physics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. T Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 You need to remember all of the public school rules for teachers like "No child left behind" bullcrap. So when you went to private school and if you didn't do well on an exam or test, were you allowed to retake it for a better grade? Hell when we grew up you had to study your ass off, there were no second or third chances. In public schools you cannot split up those who are of a higher iq from the others, they call it discrimination. Its socialist BS. To many distractions in a public school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted April 1, 2010 Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 You need to remember all of the public school rules for teachers like "No child left behind" bullcrap. So when you went to private school and if you didn't do well on an exam or test, were you allowed to retake it for a better grade? Yes, in many cases. It really was up to the teacher. It still happens on the collegiate level, not as often, but it does happen. Hell when we grew up you had to study your ass off, there were no second or third chances. In public schools you cannot split up those who are of a higher iq from the others, they call it discrimination. Its socialist BS. When exactly did you grow up? I grew up in the 90's and did go to public school from K-3rd, and 7th grade (in Mentor), and guess what, there was an accelerated program for the most intelligent kids. You had to take a test, the top scorers would be offered positions in these programs. To many distractions in a public school. Completely subjective. You can find distractions in any school. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted April 1, 2010 Author Report Share Posted April 1, 2010 Too many distractions in a public school. T Completely subjective. You can find distractions in any school. Vapor ******************************************** No, Vapor. READ. T said "TOO MANY". Has nothing to do with the issue of there is are distractions in both. There ARE more distractions in a public school. I have heard this from a LOT of kids over the years, who went to BOTH. Some preferred the private school, some preferred the other. But "Too many in a public school" does not equal "distractions in any school". geez. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pumpkin Eater Posted April 5, 2010 Report Share Posted April 5, 2010 I think the ultimate goals is learning. If you can demonstrate that you learned the material by taking an exam a second time, I have no problem with it. It probably helps many students learn the material if you consider that with no opportunity to retake a test, the student will study the material again and learn more than they would have with no opportunity to retake the test. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 I'd say I did pretty fine in public school and don't worry, I don't read any textbooks OBAMA WON'T GET TO ME WITH HIS EVIL WAYS! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted March 27, 2012 Report Share Posted March 27, 2012 Stupid stupid topic. Is this something you're really worried about, cal? Or is it just another excuse to dump on the great black enemy? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted March 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 race has nothing to do with it and you know it. It is my concern that you add all these things up, that Obamao is doing, and it adds up to Mussolini in Italy. Complete with brownshirts setting up the status quo to blow up so they and Muss could take over completely. Chavez. Look at the mountain of evidence now. Obamao's action across the board, lend great legitimacy to being concerned about how ALL the issues are pointing toward Obamao has having a dangerous, anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-CONSTITUTION agenda. Go ahead. List everything he's done, and said he WANTS to do, and look at it all. You'll see why so many of us are very, very, very concerned. With damn good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted March 28, 2012 Report Share Posted March 28, 2012 race has nothing to do with it and you know it. It is my concern that you add all these things up, that Obamao is doing, and it adds up to Mussolini in Italy. Complete with brownshirts setting up the status quo to blow up so they and Muss could take over completely. Chavez. Look at the mountain of evidence now. Obamao's action across the board, lend great legitimacy to being concerned about how ALL the issues are pointing toward Obamao has having a dangerous, anti-American, anti-capitalist, anti-CONSTITUTION agenda. Go ahead. List everything he's done, and said he WANTS to do, and look at it all. You'll see why so many of us are very, very, very concerned. With damn good reason. Well worst case scenario you only have to put up with him for four more years. Many people were concerned with George W. and his policies too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaporTrail Posted March 29, 2012 Report Share Posted March 29, 2012 Wow. Look at how much effort I used to put in my posts. Hanging out with you assholes really does lower IQ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.