Westside Steve Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 You posted in a clearly condescending tone that I was getting my information from memes. You then provided a link to Snopes, as if to debunk something. You've yet to tell me what I've said that was incorrect Are you gonna try to moonwalk all of the way out of this? If you thought I posted that in any type of condescending intent you are mistaken, even though your post which was obviously an attack certainly deserves it. I haven't said a harsh word to anyone on the subject. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 If you thought I posted that in any type of condescending intent you are mistaken, even though your post which was obviously an attack certainly deserves it. I haven't said a harsh word to anyone on the subject. WSS An attack? What? Tell me which of my first posts was an "attack". You've officially gone from backtracking on your first post to turning the whole situation on me. Just face it, you tried to get on me for "getting my info from memes", and you posted a Snopes article insinuating what I said was false. Except nothing I said was false. And now you realize that, and you're trying to backtrack. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 An attack? What? Tell me which of my first posts was an "attack". You've officially gone from backtracking on your first post to turning the whole situation on me. Just face it, you tried to get on me for "getting my info from memes", and you posted a Snopes article insinuating what I said was false. Except nothing I said was false. And now you realize that, and you're trying to backtrack. Posted the Snopes article, you miserable whining jackass, just because it laid out some of the complaints from the left and whether they believe that those were valid complaints or not. That was the sole basis for the Snopes article. Take it for what it's worth or sticking up your ass. Your little post wondering why anyone would think she was qualifying citing no Public School experience no worrying about student loans and something something grizzly bears... Not solD on her one way or the other but not being a teachers union hack is 1 plus in my opinion. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted January 21, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 You said I got my info from memes... ... And posted a Snopes article... ... Alright, fuck it Steve. You didn't do the thing you clearly did. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted January 21, 2017 Report Share Posted January 21, 2017 The OUTRAGE of the snowflakes! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cysko Kid Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 So.... Has anyone actually said why she's a good pick yet? I'm just reading a bunch of "Well Clinton picked unqualified people too!" There's not any reason why she's a good pick. People can be good at things they're not supposedly qualified for. Steve Jobs was not a tech guy. He was not an engineer and he was a douche yet he built the single most towering technology company in the country. That's not comparing Betsy DeVos to Steve Jobs, since you've shown the innate inability to not see the forest for the trees in the past, but only to point out that all the education and qualifications in the world can't make somebody good at a job. Only being good at the job can do that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MLD Woody Posted January 22, 2017 Author Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 since you've shown the innate inability to not see the forest for the trees in the past when? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tour2ma Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 It's really hard to choose, but Devos' combination of a lack of experience and purely ideological driven agenda puts her near the bottom of pile/ top of the list of objectionable cabinet nominees. We do not have to judge her in a vacuum. She has a track record in Michigan. Betsy DeVos and the twilight of public education In Detroit, parents of school-age children have plenty of choices, thanks to the nation's largest urban network of charter schools. What remains in short supply is quality. In Brightmoor, the only high school left is Detroit Community Schools, a charter boasting more than a decade of abysmal test scores and, until recently, a superintendent who earned $130,000 a year despite a dearth of educational experience or credentials. On the west side, another charter school, Hope Academy, has been serving the community around Grand River and Livernois for 20 years. Its test scores have been among the lowest in the state throughout those two decades; in 2013 the school ranked in the first percentile, the absolute bottom for academic performance. Two years later, its charter was renewed. Or if you live downtown, you could try Woodward Academy, a charter that has limped along near the bottom of school achievement since 1998, while its operator has been allowed to expand into other communities. http://www.freep.com/story/opinion/columnists/stephen-henderson/2016/12/03/betsy-devos-education-donald-trump/94728574/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tiamat63 Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Of course it's only the angle of the ideology that bothers the Democrats. Not that she's an idealogue. WSS Well no fucking shit, Charlene? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 22, 2017 Report Share Posted January 22, 2017 Well no fucking shit, Charlene? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 So, why is she a good choice again? I've been through four pages and there's been a load of back and forth about "the left only hates her because..." "trump can do what he likes" etc But nothing actually addressing the original question of her fitness for the role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 https://www.google.com/amp/www.breitbart.com/big-government/2017/01/19/lieberman-devos-qualified-not-part-education-establishment/amp/ Pretty much my thoughts. I support school choice and I realized that it's the boogeyman for the teachers union. I don't think the teachers union has been particularly beneficial to what should be the end goal which is educating people. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 "Betsy DeVos Is Qualified Because She Is Not Part of the Education Establishment" - does that make you and me qualified also? Also, school choice? Assuming you mean the following (from wikipedia): School choice is a term for K–12 public education options in the United States, describing a wide array of programs offering students and their families alternatives to publicly provided schools, to which students are generally assigned by the location of their family residence. I don't really have a problem with that in essence. I can see that it could lead to a gradation of quality of education, as some school gets ahead and then the better teachers want to go there, and so the parents want the kids to go there too etc but by and large it shouldn't be an issue. I lived in a village of not many people, maybe about a thousand high school kids total (age 13-18 because my county does three tier schooling unlike most of the country), and had a choice of three state schools (equivalent of public schools) and then of course any private/public school (private school = pay and qualify to get in; public school = future politician; yes, the naming conventions are weird). So I'm not sure school choice is such a bad thing. But again, is supporting it in itself sufficient to qualify you to hold the post of education secretary? Because so far the two criteria you've mentioned would qualify both of us, and I dare say neither of us would be particularly good at that role. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Being someone who the president of the United States has confidence in to help him formulate his position is what counts. I'm not stupid enough to think that school choice is going to make kids in the Innercity or the trailer park Rhodes Scholars. Or that the teachers union opposes school choice on the basis of what's best for the kids. And I'd say, like has happened before, 90% of the opposition to any of the appointees is Trump derangement syndrome. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 So, because Trump chose her, she's qualified? If the opposition were, as you say, "Trump derangement syndrome" then surely every single one of the appointees would be scrutinised as much? I know plenty are, but that doesn't mean they shouldn't be, while not all are being scrutinised. Sure, Sessions, Tillerson and Pruitt are, but Matthis, Lighthizer and Coats are not. Even Ben Carson is getting a kind of pass. So, to suggest that people are applying scrutiny based purely on Trump being the selector is just erroneous. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 So the Trump derangement syndrome gang likes one of the appointees and that makes them open-minded? There's probably something Cal can find about Obama that he doesn't hate. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 And any related example John McCain going off the deep end now about the Russians. If that were Donald Trump the left would be shitting their pants that he's a warmonger. And let's not pretend that McCain's main reasons are the fake Maverick act which gets his mug on MSNBC and the fact that he's pissed about the war hero bit. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 He's picking a group of advisors, so yes. Sorry 'if' she doesn't meet with your approval or Woody's approval or Chuck Schumer's approval or Al Franken's approval. WSS OK, so you literally can't point to a single tangible thing she has done in her life to make her a worthwhile candidate, and we're supposed to not care about it because Trump is so amazing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 OK, so you literally can't point to a single tangible thing she has done in her life to make her a worthwhile candidate, and we're supposed to not care about it because Trump is so amazing? Amazing? Into the hyperbolic chamber everyone! WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator. Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents. Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 But I guess that's right. For that matter I can't think of a single qualification it would make Al Franken a good United States Senator. Or any number of u.s. Senators for that matter. Or congressman or even presidents. Like I said if she were a union flack an appointed by a Democrat I'm sure you guys would have a different View. WSS Well first, I wasn't being hyperbolic, I was being factual. And that's actually factual, not 'alternative' factual. Does this mean we're back to 'but the democrats!' again? Can we close this thread with the answer "she is not qualified for this role in any way" and move on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Well first, I wasn't being hyperbolic, I was being factual. And that's actually factual, not 'alternative' factual. Does this mean we're back to 'but the democrats!' again? Can we close this thread with the answer "she is not qualified for this role in any way" and move on? If you want to. And may I add that neither you nor Woody or Chuck Schumer are qualified to even comment on the situation in any way. Do we agree on that? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Allowed to comment on the situation? Why not? I mean, I wouldn't recommend anybody here for the main 'interrogator' in the hearing, but we can talk about it all day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Allowed to comment on the situation? Why not? I mean, I wouldn't recommend anybody here for the main 'interrogator' in the hearing, but we can talk about it all day. Oh you are allowed to like the president is allowed to pick his cabinet. Just none of you are the slightest bit qualified to comment. Correct? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 PS spin boy, fake news boy, I never said you weren't allowed to do anything. Just that you weren't really qualified. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Difference being, you and I commenting doesn't impact anything, whereas being appointed secretary of something has fairly large ramifications. Also, "spin boy, fake news boy?" I feel like you're trying to insult me here but I'm not sure I really fit 'spin boy' and 'fake news boy' doesn't really mean anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 Because you suggested I said you weren't allowed to comment. So saying something that somebody else never said his fake news related. But I didn't mean to be offensive from now on it will be spin man and fake News man. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted January 23, 2017 Report Share Posted January 23, 2017 There's probably something Cal can find about Obama that he doesn't hate. WSS Shenanigans!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.