Accordingly it is the natural course of history. From the primitive communal,to slave,to feudal,to capitalist, and,inevidibly the socialist and communist phases which are not man made events, but the natural evolution of humans .
Of course there is no steering towards the end of history.

There are a whole bunch of Marxist who are not Marxist then. Perhaps Orwell's pigs are not in the Marx playbook either . But they always end up leading Communist nations .

You mean the so called "educated" people.

The ones that try to teach revisionists history which is nothing but left wing propaganda, and push a liberal agenda while education levels of our children decreases year by year.

Like how they try to teach that ancient Egyptians were Blacks (totally without any proof DNA or otherwise), and not otherwise just because they have an agenda to push and damned if they will let the facts get in the way. After all, the NEA believes it's there to indoctrinate the children into socialism... not to actually educate them.

How the Liberals think they are more or better educated is dumbfounding since they cling to beliefs and party dogma and ignore reality and facts when they conflict with party propaganda.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

...they cling to beliefs and party dogma and ignore reality and facts when they conflict with party propaganda.

---

I'm pretty sure you just described the staunch conservatives there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

You mean the so called "educated" people.

The ones that try to teach revisionists history

---

Aren't the Texas conservatives doing that by approving a curriculum that puts a religiously, politically and ideologically conservative mark (i.e. white supremacy) on history and other textbooks?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

I'm pretty sure you just described the staunch conservatives there.

---

I described the entire Democrtat party and the left wing media.

They never let facts get in their way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

They never let facts get in their way.

---

Nor do the raging mad right-wings pundits here. LOL!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

Aren't the Texas conservatives doing that by approving a curriculum that puts a religiously, politically and ideologically conservative mark (i.e., white supremacy) on history and other textbooks?

---

As opposed to what is in the textbooks now? Put there by liberals with no concern for the facts?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

As opposed to what is in the textbooks now? Put there by liberals with no concern for the facts?

---

At least some of us will miss learning about Thomas Jefferson (the historical figure, not my deceased cat).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

As opposed to what is in the textbooks now? Put there by liberals with no concern for the facts?

---

Hello again, smoothy:

I'll bet you'd have NO trouble recasting the civil war, from a fight over slavery, to a war over states rights, wouldn't you? But, that ISN'T what happened.

excon

Quote:

---

Aren't the Texas conservatives doing that by approving a curriculum that puts a religiously, politically and ideologically conservative mark (i.e., white supremacy) on history and other textbooks?

---

This must be the sequel... 'What's the matter with Texas ' .

That is not what happened there .

Quote:

---

At least some of us will miss learning about Thomas Jefferson (the historical figure, not my deceased cat).

---

The only removal of Jefferson was a revison that had called him an enlightenment thinker .They modified it to say that Jefferson was someone influences by the enlightenment . That made it more historically accurate . Jefferson was NOT an enlightenment philosopher . In the rest of the text Jefferson is given his proper due.

Actually ,come to think about it ;this appreciation of Jeffersonianism by the left is intriguing . I wonder what Jefferson's position of central government control of education by elites over local interests would be ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I'll bet you'd have NO trouble recasting the civil war, from a fight over slavery, to a war over states rights, wouldn't you? But, that ISN'T what happened.

excon

---

That's what you want it to be... because it wasn't about slavery... revisionist history WANT'S it to be purely about that... there is no proof to back that up however.

It was a part of it,. but it wasn't purely about it like you want it to be.

But like the left does... ignore the facts and try to preach propaganda... or make history books into works of fiction. Then argue... its in the book, after they wrote the book.

Every other cause I've heard can be traced directly back to the slavery issue. It was the one irreconciable dispute in the early Republic. Compromises inside the Constitution and subsequent compromises only put bandaids on the fissure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

Every other cause I've heard can be traced directly back to the slavery issue. It was the one irreconciable dispute in the early Republic. Compromises inside the Constitution and subsequent compromises only put bandaids on the fissure.

---

Oh it was part of it... but indirectly... not the sole reason for it.

That does make a huge difference. The north tried to outlaw it... not because they gave a damn about the slaves... but to put the screws on the south. And it instigated other factors that lead to the South Seceding and sparking the war.

Not because of the Norths Moral superiority or Slavery would not have been allowed as long as it was. In fact if it was over Moral reasons... it would NEVER have been allowed from the beginning.

I did not make any reference to the moral superiority of the North .I'm well aware of the economic differences between the regions. Still ,slavery was the common denominator that tied all the causes together .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

This must be the sequel... 'What's the matter with Texas ' .

That is not what happened there .


The only removal of Jefferson was a revison that had called him an enlightenment thinker .They modified it to say that Jefferson was someone influences by the enlightenment . That made it more historically accurate . Jefferson was NOT an enlightenment philosopher . In the rest of the text Jefferson is given his proper due.

Actually ,come to think about it ;this appreciation of Jeffersonianism by the left is intriguing . I wonder what Jefferson's position of central government control of education by elites over local interests would be ?

---

I find it interesting that no one looks to see what the smart people do with their texts . The State Board of Education of California is just as influential in determining the nation's texts as Texas. They are bland p.c. and very much display a bias towards the progressive agenda. According to a text publisher ,No textbook can show African Americans playing sports, Asians using computers, or women taking care of children.
http://greatbooksblog.wordpress.com/...al-publishing/

I realize of course that these images can be stereotypical. But they are far from negative stereotypes and there is certainly no dishonor in these activities. The reality is that there are women in the work force and women who stay home and raise children . There are African-Americans who participate in many professions ,and African-Americans who play sports . Why mandate this exclusion ? I suspect a lot of it has to do with the discussion I've had with Tut on this topic... the process of tear down and reconstruct.


The American Textbook council wrote an essay that is quite revealing on the issues of this OP... who wants to keep the masses stupid ?Who are the cadres ?

Quote:

---

In today's eighth-grade American histories literary quality and episodic description take a plunge. These stand in contrast to John Garraty's excellent The Story of America, introduced in California in 1991 and now out of print. California has now adopted the text-light, picture-captioned eighth-grade textbook, American Nation, from Prentice Hall, full of boxes and white space, a book that commands a huge share of the market nationwide.

In 2005 California adopted virtually every book that came to the table, including some shockingly dumbed down and biased volumes. Now the books are established in classrooms.

---

American Textbook Council - California Update

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

I did not make any reference to the moral superiority of the North .I'm well aware of the economic differences between the regions. Still ,slavery was the common denominator that tied all the causes together .

---

I agree... and a modern equivalent would be, say, someone got ticked off with the Construction Industry (or Food service, or a lot of retail)for whatever particular reason... and as retribution singled them out to make sure they never, ever used Illegal day labor.

Because if you know anyone in the industry at all, you can't run a jobsite without being fluent in spanish. As late as 25 years ago it was a decent paying respectible blue collar job that an American could raise a family on and provide a decent lifestyle.

Today, wages are lower than they were 25 years ago even before making allowances for inflation, because of the numbers of illegal and day labor being paid a fraction of what was paid to legal US citizens. And is so prevalent that you can't hire legal crews and pay a fair wage while remaining competitive.

The Industrial north essentually worked to cut off the labor intensive agricultural souths cheap labor as payback.

Taken into perspective... todays illegal worker problem isn't that far removed from events that led to the Civil war. Common sense it to toss them out, after all the law requires just that... but interests that depend on the cheap labor have politicians in their pocket bought and paid for defending their practice. Not unlike the old south and slavery.

And if you give it some thought... it ISN'T much of a stretch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Today, wages are lower than they were 25 years ago even before making allowances for inflation, because of the numbers of illegal and day labor being paid a fraction of what was paid to legal US citizens. And is so prevalent that you can't hire legal crews and pay a fair wage while remaining competitive.

---

The obvious solution is to severely penalize the employers who hire undocumented workers and pay them low wages that undercut the standard and reasonable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

The obvious solution is to severely penalize the employers who hire undocumented workers and pay them low wages that undercut the standard and reasonable.

---

How about penalizing the people that broke the law violating our borders. The Illegals themselves.

That's not much different than arresting the sotore clerk for having marked money from a bank robbery, but letting the bank robbers that stole the money go free.

Many of the illegals after all have fake (forged) papers with stolen or invalid SSN's that may appear valid to employers that don't have the ability to verify them,

Incidentally... the illegals that use these are also guilty of Identity theft, besides the other laws they broke. They are far from innocent.

Not all illegals are obviously illegal to the employer.

I don't have a problem going after employers as well, that obviously do not have the required papers for each employee. And THAT is not the case in a good many.

The Illegals in many cases provide the required papers, they just aren't real... could YOU spot a real from fake green card? And How. Unless you work with them daily, and even then its not a sure thing... I know I couldn't.

Some employers get duped... not all, but enough do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

How about penalizing the people that broke the law violating our borders.

---

If there were no cushy jobs (harvesting crops in Arizona and Texas heat, running the dishwasher at the back of a hot restaurant kitchen, etc.) with money handed to them under the table, the illegals would not come.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

If there were no cushy jobs (harvesting crops in Arizona and Texas heat, running the dishwasher at the back of a hot restaurant kitchen, etc.) with money handed to them under the table, the illegals would not come.

---

You have some very real misconceptions about illegals.

I know several employers (Personal friends of mine) that got notified of having multiple employees using other peoples SSN's after years of them working there, having taxes taken out, etc.. before they found out. Many had outstayed expired H-1B visas, or Visas to attend college, not work.

All illegals aren't Latino... not all illegals barely speak english... and not all illegals are poorly eductated. And MOST IMPORTANT, not all illegals hold menial labor jobs.

I've seen companies that had illegal computer programmers and engineers working that got caught and deported. Some were Indian, some were East European as examples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Many of the illegals after all have fake (forged) papers with stolen or invalid SSN's that may appear valid to employers that don't have the ability to verify them,

---

Hello again, smoothy:

You'd think that in these days of Patriot Act invasions, that employers in this country would be able to identify exactly WHO is applying... And, they could too, if we had a national ID card. But, conservatives don't want to do that... I don't know why..

Hmmm... I wonder if it has to do with giving COVER to their ILLEGAL HIRING practices, like you just did. Nahhh... They wouldn't do that, would they?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

All illegals aren't Latino....not all illegals barely speak english.....and not all illegals are poorly eductated. And MOST IMPORTANT, not all illegals hold menial labor jobs.

---

True, but the majority are and do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

You'd think that in these days of Patriot Act invasions, that employers in this country would be able to identify exactly WHO is applying.... And, they could too, if we had a national ID card. But, conservatives don't wanna do that... I dunno why..

Hmmm.... I wonder if it has to do with giving COVER to their ILLEGAL HIRING practices, like you just did. Nahhh... They wouldn't do that, would they?

excon

---

Really any proof of THAT claim...


It was the Democrats that were screaming about NOT having a national Id Card when it came up under Bush.


And Besides... 19 months now Democrats have been in the White house, and held Majorities in the House and Senate... exactly WHAT was stopping them from doing it if it's a cause they support?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

True, but the majority are and do.

---

Doesn't matter. Latinos aren't either an endangered species or a protected class.

There are no civil wars in latino countries at this time... and there are no ongoing famins or Genocides. There is NO excuse for not staying in their homeland until they get legal permission to come here the right way. Brown, black, white or yellow. It applies to everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

There are no civil wars in latino countries at this time

---

The drug wars in Mexico?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

Really any proof of THAT claim...

---

Hello again, smoothy:

You should know by now that I don't guess about the stuff I say. If I say it, you can take it to the bank!

The Democrats' immigration-reform proposal is 26 pages long. Pages 8 through 18 are devoted to "ending illegal employment through biometric employment verification." I don't think the Democrats are going to like me calling this a biometric national ID card, as they go to great lengths to say that it is not a national ID card, but it is.

Uhhhh, the Republicans didn't support this bill, or it would BE the law, and you couldn't whine anymore.

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

You should know by now that I don't guess about the stuff I say. If I say it, you can take it to the bank!

The Democrats' immigration-reform proposal is 26 pages long. Pages 8 through 18 are devoted to "ending illegal employment through biometric employment verification." I don't think the Democrats are going to like me calling this a biometric national ID card, as they go to great lengths to say that it is not a national ID card, but it is.

Uhhhh, the Republicans didn't support this bill, or it would BE the law, and you couldn't whine anymore.

excon

---

So, explain the Democrats opposition of a national ID card when Bush Proposed it.

Coalition letter to President Bush Urging Him to Reject National ID Card | American Civil Liberties Union

Dated 2002.. 8 years ago... and the negativity from the left, and look at the list of Liberals opposing it when Bush first suggested it. Funny how certain democrats will jump on the Obama bandwagon when the Messiah proposses it, yet fought against the very same thing only several years earlier under Bush.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

The drug wars in Mexico?

---

But the Drug dealers and users are such nice people they (the liberals) want to incorporate them into our economy.

So... they can't go south in their own country...


And besides... lame excuse since so many AREN'T Mexican to begin with.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

And besides....lame excuse since so many AREN'T Mexican to begin with.

---

And what are they?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by smoothy

So, explain the Democrats opposition of a national ID card when Bush Proposed it.

---

Hello again, smoothy:

I don't know. How about they opposed it because they opposed EVERYTHING Bush put on the table (except the invasion of Iraq, the Patriot Act, torture, and stuff like that), EVEN legislation they liked simply because of WHO was proposing it?? Exactly like the Republicans are doing now...

What?? You think, that I think the Democrats are great governors and leaders?? Hmmm. You really haven't read much of my stuff, have you?

excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

And what are they?

---

Look on a map... Mexico doesn't encompass everything between Texas and Antartica. Most of the Illegals come from the northern half of South America, and the entirety of Central America on top of Mexico, and most come Through mexico doing it.

Want to see hypocrisy... Look at Mexicos laws about Illegals... then listen to Calderone harping about us not having open borders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by excon

Hello again, smoothy:

I dunno. How about they opposed it because they opposed EVERYTHING Bush put on the table (except the invasion of Iraq, the Patriot Act, torture, and stuff like that), EVEN legislation they liked simply because of WHO was proposing it??? Exactly like the Republicans are doing now....

What??? You think, that I think the Democrats are great governors and leaders??? Hmmm. You really haven't read much of my stuff, have you?

excon

---

Well, Obama didn't support the Surge in Iraq... Harry Ried was saying it didn't work and the war was lost... before the surge ever started... and tries to take credit for it just the same.

But heck... we all know the Democrats mindset... They Hated every good idea and good thing George Bush had and did... but they would cheerfully support Obama shreading the Constitution, just because the Messiah was doing it. They would even think the very same things were a good Idea if Obama suggested it even when they fought the very same things when Bush suggested them.


Personally, I think the right national ID would be good... and prevent voter fraud in Democrat disticts.

But I know the democrats, and they would set up a table at the border and give the ID's to every illegal that crossed the border eliminating any possible good it would achieve. And essentually make it worthless.

I would hardly call an outline entitled 'Conceptual Proposal for Immigration Reform'.. "legislation". This is not even in committee for consideration.

The biometric SS card is not a new idea . It has been on the table for years. It is silly to say that Republicans are against it because they oppose the comprehensive reform ideas the Democrats make. All I had to do is read the 1st page ,with the Democrats paying lip service to border security to know how phony this is . They are sly... I'll give them that much . In an election year where John McCain has suddenly found the merits of border security ;they added language in this blue print that he would have a hard time objecting to. His Democrat opponent will use the same political argument that Excon just used.. . if you oppose this proposal it must then be true that you oppose border security (or biomatrix id cards etc. ).
These proposals will never see the light of day in Democrat sponsored lmmigration reform legislation.

You think I'm wrong ? This phony proposal calls for drones to patrol the border . You really think the Dems want that ? The proposal gives DHS the authority to deploy the National Guard for border patrol . That's a Dem idea ? Lol

It is not a serious proposal and I suspect Excon is well aware of that.

Well, whatever happens... Obama will Blame it on Bush... and the democrats won't hold the new title holder "The Teflon Don" responsible for anything he does on his watch, under his authority. Been 19 months so far... only 25 more to go... why start accepting responsibility now...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

You think I'm wrong ? This phony proposal calls for drones to patrol the border . You really think the Dems want that ? The proposal gives DHS the authority to deploy the National Guard for border patrol . That's a Dem idea ? lol

It is not a serious proposal and I suspect Excon is well aware of that.

---

Hello again, tom:

Certainly I think you're wrong.. Maybe my eyes were deceiving me, but I believe Obama LAUNCHED a drone on the border YESTERDAY... Something you say the Dems DON'T want, and won't DO... Whadya know about that?

excon

Well how about that?! Are they armed ? We could have an 'Alien versus Predator' sequel .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tomder55

wrong premise . When she speaks of the elites ,she speaks of progressive,liberal ,Washington DC ,or Hollywood elites. She is not refering to their level of education.

It is these "elites" she is refering to who think the people who do things like attend tea party rallies or oppose the progressive agenda are the uneducated ya-hoos.

They even wrote a book about the stupid people who don't see things their way.
'What's the Matter with Kansas?' tries to explain the ignorant folks who ,according to the author vote ,against their own self interest .
The elite progressives creamed when they read this because it affirmed all their misconceptions about the people in "flyover country".
It was on the bible of the elites ;the NY Slimes best seller's list for 18 weeks .

Like you ,the author of this book presumes that the unwashed masses are led like sheeple because they are too stupid to weigh the benefits of the opposing positions and come to conclusions on their own.

The obvious flaws in your thesis is that overwhelmingly the poorer less educated people of this country tend to support the liberals agenda of a government nanny-state.It is the progressives who have a stake in keeping the poor and uneducated ignorant. It is this group that they count on as a voting block.

Further ,the underlying assumption that it is manipulation of social issues that keeps us dummies stirred up is false. The tea party movement has been almost totally an economic revolt against a government that thinks everyone has a bottomless pocket.It is resistance to the expansion of government power, and intrusiveness.It is the national debt fueled by out of control spending that has fueled this movement.

And how have the "elites " those people you think are educated responded ? They are contemptuous of people who disagree with them . Tea party supporters are called tea-baggers .A legitimate grass roots movement is disparaged as "astro-turf". We are racists for not going along with the radical agenda of the President. We are nativists because we think the government should control illegal immigration . We are homophobic for opposing a radical redefinition of marriage .And now our phobias have extended to Muslims because we think it's a bad idea to build a towering mosque over the WTC site .

We the "bitter clingers" (Obama's words to a gathering of wine and brie "educated elites "in San Fran) are a bunch of Know-nothings according to Timothy Egan of the NY Slimes.

It is the progressives in this country who think that the masses are insecure bitter clinging intolerant bigots who need to be governed by an aristocracy of educated(leftist) elites.

---

YEAH! tomder55 for president so's us poor unedjemacated idiots can have someone who ain't all upity upity and stuff. Them upity upity folks think they poop don't stink!
Right on tomder55.

Where is science and civics kept out the classroom? Where is religion being brought into the classroom? Not around here. Oh wait, maybe I think that because I am not the "elite" but rather the "common sense" variety of citizen.

When my son was in high and in biology class, my (now ex) husband and I went to talk to the teacher and ask if the opposing theory of evolution could be introduced in the classroom (that being creationism) and she said no. If we wanted that taught, we were (and did) to do that at home.

This garbage about elite versus uneducated has been going on hundreds of years already. I do not deny that is occurs. It's the way to make the other look better than they really are. I went to college where plenty of silver-spooned young adults attended and were insufferable. If anything, they loved to throw that "better than you" around. I always remembered what my Dad taught me - they all have to sit on the toilet the same way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bleusong52

Where is science and civics kept out the classroom? Where is religion being brought into the classroom?

When my son was in high and in biology class, my (now ex) husband and I went to talk to the teacher and ask if the opposing theory of evolution could be introduced in the classroom (that being creationism) and she said no.

---

Hello bleu:

If it's not around there, it's because you FAILED at your mission. However, SOME parents have been successful at bringing creationism into the classroom, like you TRIED to do, and it's THOSE classes in particular that I'm referring to..

excon

What is this "elite" american type that you guys refer to? I never got that. Anyone have a good definition for me?