Youngkin creates tip line for parents and students to report teachers for Thought Crime

[Anonymous]

It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

For him. But it’s not a success for anyone else that so many are so easily duped.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

For him. But it’s not a success for anyone else that so many are so easily duped.

Yep. He's just doing it to appeal to his base. It's just another non-issue that is a total waste of time/energy, kind of like the bathroom wars . Both sides seem to be duped, as it's a waste of time/energy to even think about this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not BS...google it. Many links have already been provided in this thread. You are just choosing to ignore them.

Nope. Are you new here? You make a claim, you provide the links. But you can’t because you’re a liar.

There have been many links provided in this thread. You have chosen to ignore them.

Zero links about John Lewis and Ruby Bridges being "banned." But you know that. Keep up the good fight (aka narrative)!

NP but here is the complaint from the Williamson County, TN “Moms for Liberty” wanting to dump books about Martin Luther King, Ruby Bridges and segregation, calling them CRT.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16W9grkwSFsIPRQOSpQfnAHNJzvDH5Bkk/view

Some of this would be more appropriate for fifth or sixth grade than for second. I am of an age to remember some of the events, and it is not wrong to teach about them. But, I do think that some of this is a little strong for 7 year olds. It does encourage "all white people are bad" with some of the books. Seven year olds are not old enough to understand. That does not mean they cannot be taught about MLK--but teaching about Bull Connor at second grade is a little too much. It should be taught, but not at second grade.

Are you joking? No, they want to dump books about MLK and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want kids taught about American history. They certainly don’t want kids to know that their parents and grandparents were and are shockingly racist people.

DP and I didn't get that from the letter. I did get that they feel the books are just not appropriate for 2nd graders. While reading the letter, what struck me is that fact that 2nd graders today really don't have any context for these stories. They never see this happen, they don't hear their parents talk about it, they don't see it in the media, they watch kids shows with diverse casts of kids both animated and real life actors, these same shows stress be kind, be nice to everyone, we all have differences it's ok be nice, Obama was the president.

We get upset and object because we are older. We have more context and though there aren't likely many of us posting her that actually lived through segregation but it wasn't far enough removed that we didn't see it's remnants in some way growing up.

Racism still exists today but today a lot of it is more subtle [imo that makes it worse ...]
Reading about history and telling kids that we as white people got it wrong is ok.
And if we don't do it with books and stories that are age appropriate than kids miss the point and there is very little understanding.
The vast majority of people way over estimate the reading abilities and comprehension of 2nd graders.
Picture books are still appropriate for 2nd graders btw
There are 2nd graders who will not even be able to read the word "injustice".
The concept at 2nd grade history needs to be - in the past we did things wrong. Segregation was wrong. It was stopped. We will never do it again.
And as the years go by it becomes am more sophisticated explanation.
History isn't going anywhere and if it takes a few years to fully impart the depth of the situation that was, it really is ok.
It happened. It's not going to unhappen.

[Anonymous]

Youngkin is a douchebag. Too bad Virginians were too stupid to see that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Youngkin’s education tip line gripes: ‘Beowulf,’ masks and ‘grooming’
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2022/11/03/youngkin-education-tip-line-emails/

aka "The Greatest Hits of Fox News"

though, I doubt many of their viewers remember Beowulf lol

What’s wrong with Beowulf??

The tip sent in was this, apparently:

“All my teacher wants to talk about is how the book is sexist because it portrays the warriors as men and not women,” the student wrote Jan. 30 to the teacher tip line that Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) had just set up to banish “divisive concepts” from public education. “I believe my teacher is in violation of Governor Youngkin’s Executive Order, which prohibits the teaching of ‘divisive topics.’

So now “Beowulf” is sexist?? Because the warriors actually were men and not women? JFC.

You may want to consider the possibility that a high school student writing to a "report your teacher" tip line isn't going to be a totally reliable source for what a teacher said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Youngkin is a douchebag. Too bad Virginians were too stupid to see that.

Despite all of the ink spilled about disaffected rural voters and focus groups centering concerned suburban moms, this is pretty much what it all boils down to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not BS...google it. Many links have already been provided in this thread. You are just choosing to ignore them.

Nope. Are you new here? You make a claim, you provide the links. But you can’t because you’re a liar.

There have been many links provided in this thread. You have chosen to ignore them.

Zero links about John Lewis and Ruby Bridges being "banned." But you know that. Keep up the good fight (aka narrative)!

NP but here is the complaint from the Williamson County, TN “Moms for Liberty” wanting to dump books about Martin Luther King, Ruby Bridges and segregation, calling them CRT.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16W9grkwSFsIPRQOSpQfnAHNJzvDH5Bkk/view

Some of this would be more appropriate for fifth or sixth grade than for second. I am of an age to remember some of the events, and it is not wrong to teach about them. But, I do think that some of this is a little strong for 7 year olds. It does encourage "all white people are bad" with some of the books. Seven year olds are not old enough to understand. That does not mean they cannot be taught about MLK--but teaching about Bull Connor at second grade is a little too much. It should be taught, but not at second grade.

Are you joking? No, they want to dump books about MLK and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want kids taught about American history. They certainly don’t want kids to know that their parents and grandparents were and are shockingly racist people.

DP and I didn't get that from the letter. I did get that they feel the books are just not appropriate for 2nd graders. While reading the letter, what struck me is that fact that 2nd graders today really don't have any context for these stories. They never see this happen, they don't hear their parents talk about it, they don't see it in the media, they watch kids shows with diverse casts of kids both animated and real life actors, these same shows stress be kind, be nice to everyone, we all have differences it's ok be nice, Obama was the president.

We get upset and object because we are older. We have more context and though there aren't likely many of us posting her that actually lived through segregation but it wasn't far enough removed that we didn't see it's remnants in some way growing up.

Racism still exists today but today a lot of it is more subtle [imo that makes it worse ...]
Reading about history and telling kids that we as white people got it wrong is ok.
And if we don't do it with books and stories that are age appropriate than kids miss the point and there is very little understanding.
The vast majority of people way over estimate the reading abilities and comprehension of 2nd graders.
Picture books are still appropriate for 2nd graders btw
There are 2nd graders who will not even be able to read the word "injustice".
The concept at 2nd grade history needs to be - in the past we did things wrong. Segregation was wrong. It was stopped. We will never do it again.
And as the years go by it becomes am more sophisticated explanation.
History isn't going anywhere and if it takes a few years to fully impart the depth of the situation that was, it really is ok.
It happened. It's not going to unhappen.

Loving v. Virginia was decided in 1967. Virginia still has a number of so-called “segregation academies” founded as part of the Massive Resistance movement in response to Brown v. Bd. Of Education.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not BS...google it. Many links have already been provided in this thread. You are just choosing to ignore them.

Nope. Are you new here? You make a claim, you provide the links. But you can’t because you’re a liar.

There have been many links provided in this thread. You have chosen to ignore them.

Zero links about John Lewis and Ruby Bridges being "banned." But you know that. Keep up the good fight (aka narrative)!

NP but here is the complaint from the Williamson County, TN “Moms for Liberty” wanting to dump books about Martin Luther King, Ruby Bridges and segregation, calling them CRT.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16W9grkwSFsIPRQOSpQfnAHNJzvDH5Bkk/view

Some of this would be more appropriate for fifth or sixth grade than for second. I am of an age to remember some of the events, and it is not wrong to teach about them. But, I do think that some of this is a little strong for 7 year olds. It does encourage "all white people are bad" with some of the books. Seven year olds are not old enough to understand. That does not mean they cannot be taught about MLK--but teaching about Bull Connor at second grade is a little too much. It should be taught, but not at second grade.

Are you joking? No, they want to dump books about MLK and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want kids taught about American history. They certainly don’t want kids to know that their parents and grandparents were and are shockingly racist people.

DP and I didn't get that from the letter. I did get that they feel the books are just not appropriate for 2nd graders. While reading the letter, what struck me is that fact that 2nd graders today really don't have any context for these stories. They never see this happen, they don't hear their parents talk about it, they don't see it in the media, they watch kids shows with diverse casts of kids both animated and real life actors, these same shows stress be kind, be nice to everyone, we all have differences it's ok be nice, Obama was the president.

We get upset and object because we are older. We have more context and though there aren't likely many of us posting her that actually lived through segregation but it wasn't far enough removed that we didn't see it's remnants in some way growing up.

Racism still exists today but today a lot of it is more subtle [imo that makes it worse ...]
Reading about history and telling kids that we as white people got it wrong is ok.
And if we don't do it with books and stories that are age appropriate than kids miss the point and there is very little understanding.
The vast majority of people way over estimate the reading abilities and comprehension of 2nd graders.
Picture books are still appropriate for 2nd graders btw
There are 2nd graders who will not even be able to read the word "injustice".
The concept at 2nd grade history needs to be - in the past we did things wrong. Segregation was wrong. It was stopped. We will never do it again.
And as the years go by it becomes am more sophisticated explanation.
History isn't going anywhere and if it takes a few years to fully impart the depth of the situation that was, it really is ok.
It happened. It's not going to unhappen.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVJmnPbrcwQ

This is "Ruby Bridges Goes to School: My True Story" it seems totally appropriate to be read to a second grader.

[Anonymous]

Ruby Bridges is only 68. It was common to cross paths with John Lewis around the Capitol Hill neighborhood until his passing. These aren’t events from the mists of history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

For him. But it’s not a success for anyone else that so many are so easily duped.

Yes, that's the point. And, Youngkin found how ignorant and racist his base is, so can then plan accordingly to win yet again--and not have to keep any campaign promises.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not BS...google it. Many links have already been provided in this thread. You are just choosing to ignore them.

Nope. Are you new here? You make a claim, you provide the links. But you can’t because you’re a liar.

There have been many links provided in this thread. You have chosen to ignore them.

Zero links about John Lewis and Ruby Bridges being "banned." But you know that. Keep up the good fight (aka narrative)!

NP but here is the complaint from the Williamson County, TN “Moms for Liberty” wanting to dump books about Martin Luther King, Ruby Bridges and segregation, calling them CRT.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16W9grkwSFsIPRQOSpQfnAHNJzvDH5Bkk/view

Some of this would be more appropriate for fifth or sixth grade than for second. I am of an age to remember some of the events, and it is not wrong to teach about them. But, I do think that some of this is a little strong for 7 year olds. It does encourage "all white people are bad" with some of the books. Seven year olds are not old enough to understand. That does not mean they cannot be taught about MLK--but teaching about Bull Connor at second grade is a little too much. It should be taught, but not at second grade.

Are you joking? No, they want to dump books about MLK and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want kids taught about American history. They certainly don’t want kids to know that their parents and grandparents were and are shockingly racist people.

DP and I didn't get that from the letter. I did get that they feel the books are just not appropriate for 2nd graders. While reading the letter, what struck me is that fact that 2nd graders today really don't have any context for these stories. They never see this happen, they don't hear their parents talk about it, they don't see it in the media, they watch kids shows with diverse casts of kids both animated and real life actors, these same shows stress be kind, be nice to everyone, we all have differences it's ok be nice, Obama was the president.

We get upset and object because we are older. We have more context and though there aren't likely many of us posting her that actually lived through segregation but it wasn't far enough removed that we didn't see it's remnants in some way growing up.

Racism still exists today but today a lot of it is more subtle [imo that makes it worse ...]
Reading about history and telling kids that we as white people got it wrong is ok.
And if we don't do it with books and stories that are age appropriate than kids miss the point and there is very little understanding.
The vast majority of people way over estimate the reading abilities and comprehension of 2nd graders.
Picture books are still appropriate for 2nd graders btw
There are 2nd graders who will not even be able to read the word "injustice".
The concept at 2nd grade history needs to be - in the past we did things wrong. Segregation was wrong. It was stopped. We will never do it again.
And as the years go by it becomes am more sophisticated explanation.
History isn't going anywhere and if it takes a few years to fully impart the depth of the situation that was, it really is ok.
It happened. It's not going to unhappen.

Loving v. Virginia was decided in 1967. Virginia still has a number of so-called “segregation academies” founded as part of the Massive Resistance movement in response to Brown v. Bd. Of Education.

Yep, and I attended one that was founded at that time and am in my 50s now. It wasn't so long ago. While I (and a few others) have changed course, most of my former classmates are as racist as they come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Not BS...google it. Many links have already been provided in this thread. You are just choosing to ignore them.

Nope. Are you new here? You make a claim, you provide the links. But you can’t because you’re a liar.

There have been many links provided in this thread. You have chosen to ignore them.

Zero links about John Lewis and Ruby Bridges being "banned." But you know that. Keep up the good fight (aka narrative)!

NP but here is the complaint from the Williamson County, TN “Moms for Liberty” wanting to dump books about Martin Luther King, Ruby Bridges and segregation, calling them CRT.
https://drive.google.com/file/d/16W9grkwSFsIPRQOSpQfnAHNJzvDH5Bkk/view

Some of this would be more appropriate for fifth or sixth grade than for second. I am of an age to remember some of the events, and it is not wrong to teach about them. But, I do think that some of this is a little strong for 7 year olds. It does encourage "all white people are bad" with some of the books. Seven year olds are not old enough to understand. That does not mean they cannot be taught about MLK--but teaching about Bull Connor at second grade is a little too much. It should be taught, but not at second grade.

Are you joking? No, they want to dump books about MLK and Ruby Bridges. They don’t want kids taught about American history. They certainly don’t want kids to know that their parents and grandparents were and are shockingly racist people.

DP and I didn't get that from the letter. I did get that they feel the books are just not appropriate for 2nd graders. While reading the letter, what struck me is that fact that 2nd graders today really don't have any context for these stories. They never see this happen, they don't hear their parents talk about it, they don't see it in the media, they watch kids shows with diverse casts of kids both animated and real life actors, these same shows stress be kind, be nice to everyone, we all have differences it's ok be nice, Obama was the president.

We get upset and object because we are older. We have more context and though there aren't likely many of us posting her that actually lived through segregation but it wasn't far enough removed that we didn't see it's remnants in some way growing up.

Racism still exists today but today a lot of it is more subtle [imo that makes it worse ...]
Reading about history and telling kids that we as white people got it wrong is ok.
And if we don't do it with books and stories that are age appropriate than kids miss the point and there is very little understanding.
The vast majority of people way over estimate the reading abilities and comprehension of 2nd graders.
Picture books are still appropriate for 2nd graders btw
There are 2nd graders who will not even be able to read the word "injustice".
The concept at 2nd grade history needs to be - in the past we did things wrong. Segregation was wrong. It was stopped. We will never do it again.
And as the years go by it becomes am more sophisticated explanation.
History isn't going anywhere and if it takes a few years to fully impart the depth of the situation that was, it really is ok.
It happened. It's not going to unhappen.

You are really taking the white supremacists’ line as your own in your first half. Here are the dark, foreboding books that are threatening the white children of these racist wienies:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

For him. But it’s not a success for anyone else that so many are so easily duped.

Yes, that's the point. And, Youngkin found how ignorant and racist his base is, so can then plan accordingly to win yet again--and not have to keep any campaign promises.

Yesterday’s wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing is today’s fascist-in-fleece-vest. He has to out-performative authoritarian DeSantis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It got Younkin elected, so for him "CRT" and the tip line were a "success."

For him. But it’s not a success for anyone else that so many are so easily duped.

Yes, that's the point. And, Youngkin found how ignorant and racist his base is, so can then plan accordingly to win yet again--and not have to keep any campaign promises.

Yesterday’s wolf-in-sheep’s-clothing is today’s fascist-in-fleece-vest. He has to out-performative authoritarian DeSantis.

Exactly! Hitler did not do it alone.