Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think he will serve a full term? I do not see.

Without question he will serve his full term. Looking forward to 4 years of his leadership!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

I agree with you that the EO doesn't direct ban teaching about slavery, but it still can have a chilling effect on what gets taught, because if some parent decides to make noise about an appropriate lesson about, say, the motivations behind the Civil War by claiming the teacher said or implied something they didn't, which could create some real problems for the teacher if they are accused of teaching "divisive" material in violation of the EO. It will discourage teachers from teaching anything but a very whitewashed view of American history and society for fear of becoming a target for the tiki torch crowd.

Good. As social studies and history are currently being taught, in elementary and high school, needs to be changed.

Er, no. I'm just a regular parent who isn't happy at the pure-gloom view of history and social studies that my kids are learning in school.

“Pure-gloom view”?

Which grades? School system?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

I agree with you that the EO doesn't direct ban teaching about slavery, but it still can have a chilling effect on what gets taught, because if some parent decides to make noise about an appropriate lesson about, say, the motivations behind the Civil War by claiming the teacher said or implied something they didn't, which could create some real problems for the teacher if they are accused of teaching "divisive" material in violation of the EO. It will discourage teachers from teaching anything but a very whitewashed view of American history and society for fear of becoming a target for the tiki torch crowd.

Good. As social studies and history are currently being taught, in elementary and high school, needs to be changed.

Er, no. I'm just a regular parent who isn't happy at the pure-gloom view of history and social studies that my kids are learning in school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

I agree with you that the EO doesn't direct ban teaching about slavery, but it still can have a chilling effect on what gets taught, because if some parent decides to make noise about an appropriate lesson about, say, the motivations behind the Civil War by claiming the teacher said or implied something they didn't, which could create some real problems for the teacher if they are accused of teaching "divisive" material in violation of the EO. It will discourage teachers from teaching anything but a very whitewashed view of American history and society for fear of becoming a target for the tiki torch crowd.

Good. As social studies and history are currently being taught, in elementary and high school, needs to be changed.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

I agree with you that the EO doesn't direct ban teaching about slavery, but it still can have a chilling effect on what gets taught, because if some parent decides to make noise about an appropriate lesson about, say, the motivations behind the Civil War by claiming the teacher said or implied something they didn't, which could create some real problems for the teacher if they are accused of teaching "divisive" material in violation of the EO. It will discourage teachers from teaching anything but a very whitewashed view of American history and society for fear of becoming a target for the tiki torch crowd.

Good. As social studies and history are currently being taught, in elementary and high school, needs to be changed.

Anonymous wrote:Forgive my ignorance - what happened in Loudoun County that is being investigated?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

I agree with you that the EO doesn't direct ban teaching about slavery, but it still can have a chilling effect on what gets taught, because if some parent decides to make noise about an appropriate lesson about, say, the motivations behind the Civil War by claiming the teacher said or implied something they didn't, which could create some real problems for the teacher if they are accused of teaching "divisive" material in violation of the EO. It will discourage teachers from teaching anything but a very whitewashed view of American history and society for fear of becoming a target for the tiki torch crowd.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

The EO prohibits any teaching that places blame on a protected class today for wrongs committed by people in the class in the past. Are teachers really telling white kids they are responsible for slavery? I doubt it. Teachers can attribute past wrongdoings to racism by whites during that time period. I don’t think the EO does anything.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Or: Many quite radical racists now have an easy, pre-approved way to continue to whitewash history by labeling everything that they dislike as CRT.

There are more than two options.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If, as the allknowing MSM contended, Virginia schools weren't teaching critical race theory, and saying so was just a racist dogwhistle, who cares that GY just banned it being taught?

2 options:

- CRT does not exist in VA schools, so you have ZERO to complain about the EO, or

- CRT-like curricula (such as the divisive 1619 Project) are indeed taught, so you and McAuliffe were lying and dishonest this whole time, not to mention, you were trying to spread hate in our schools.

Pick one.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think he will serve a full term? I do not see.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Do you think he will serve a full term? I do not see.

He does not need to resign to making a failing big for the Tepublican nomination in 2024, so he probably will.

Anonymous wrote:Do you think he will serve a full term? I do not see.