yes it was nice to work like the look more into the hands of health by admin…

Hello Thanks heaps for this indeed!… if anyone else has anything, it would be much appreciated. Great website Super Piano Links http://www.en.Grand-Pianos.org Enjoy!…

You knocked the whole thing off? Are you kidding? You just chose which conservatives’ postings you like and knock off the rest? Was it because I stated I had previously tried contacting you- weeks ago- about all this? I never got an answer… is that something the rest of the readers shouldn’t see? Maybe that’s why you deleted my comment.

Of all the conservative pushing and ranting, you have here a conservative who reads your site every day- you’ve even given me HTs and linked to my blog before- who can’t believe you’d just up and delete that comment.

Does this mean I should seek help from someone willing to do more than TALK??? I mean, come on. Shocking. I’ll be sure to share this information… I’m very disappointed in you- especially considering the other trolls and trash you allow to comment here.

On November 3rd, 2009 at 2:31 pm, emjem24 said:

Really? Poor, zyzzyg, it must be so hard to continue on this blog with that victim complex and belief that everything you say is “misrepresented.” We could discuss the many times you’ve made “leaps” in logic. I guess that’s one of your “facts” not in evidence.

Interesting thought. You attributed something to me that I did not say, and now I am a victim for calling you out for your misrepresentation. Cut and paste where I said anything close to your assertion, “. . . according to zyzzyg, we have more to worry about from the likes of Tea Party activists than those who participate in the Rouge Forum. They’re both the same in his eyes.

If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion.

Of course you haven’t. Not many Americans have except those associated with the education field. Perhaps, if you actually went on their website and gained an insight in the similarities between them and other far-left groups you wouldn’t be making leaps in logic like you’ve done on this topic.

How could I possibly go on a website that I never heard of? No, it wasn’t me that made a leap in logic. You said that somehow I see something, that I never heard of, the same way I am supposed to see another group. How is that even possible? It isn’t even logical.

Would it be fair of me to say that, “According to Emjem24, we have more to worry about from the likes of Tea Partiers activists than those who participate in the Pain Pudre Forum. They’re both the same in her eyes.” Would it be accurate? Do you even know what the Pain Pudre Forum is? Should I be called out for saying, suggesting, and asserting such a thing?

Oohhh… I’m just taking a page out of your own blogging handbook, Zyzzyg. Facts are wonderful things… perhaps you should become acquainted with them as well since you’ve “misrepresented” the goals of the teaparty movement. I could care less what is the “same in your own eyes” because you’ve proven time and time again that not only are you not willing to hear out conservatives you’re just as “entrenched” as you think “we” are.

Please, cut and paste where I have misrepresented the goals of the Tea Party movement? If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion.

Yes, I have asked whether they would support, or have supported, the abolition of other Government programs and spending. And, aren’t those part of the goals of the Tea Party? Smaller Government and less spending?

And, what makes you think I am unwilling to hear out conservatives? Are we not communicating? You used the phrase “same in your eyes.” I did not. I asked you, how do you know how I see things? If you could care less about the phrase, why did you use it?

It’s Rouge Forum. Of course you don’t. You let other people do your research for you. The internet is a beautiful thing. Perhaps, you should broaden your horizons?

Why would I research something I never heard of? You made the initial reference to them, not me. The logic escapes me.

And you wonder why people have a beef with you? Was this necessary? If you’re going to be disrespectful, then why bother responding? What is your problem?

I don’t wonder why people have a beef, or anything, with me. Their reasons are their own. What I do is ask questions and challenge people when they take me to task. Much like what is happening between you and me right now.

I made a comment to MM’s Blog, and I was taken to task. I responded, either offering more information or asking questions. Are you suggesting that people have beefs because they take me to task and I respond?

Moreover, the statement I made may have been a feeble attempt at humor. And, yes it was necessary. A little snark is readily found on this blog. Do you take issue with everyone for snark and humor? Do you have a beef with people who do it to others? I was making fun of a group that I had never heard of before you mentioned them. Lighten up.

As for disrespect who do you take to task for making fun of others and calling them names? Do you address every instance of disrespect?

I’m simply illustrating the weakness in your argument in comparing tactics or advocating similar tactics be used on the conservative, grassroots side. Is this the “direct engagement” you speak of? Are you simply unwilling to hear out others? Or are you only willing to display your own viewpoint without acknowledging its weaknesses?

How is it a weakness to say that if you advocate a position, and then that protest is one tactic to achieve your goal? Are the conservatives and grassroots side protesting, or not? Have other groups protested? Should conservatives and grassroots side not protest? Should they not protest because it is a tactic that others have used? Protesting to advance your argument, does not make your argument the same, or equal to, another group that also protests. You do understand that, correct?

Not sure I said ‘direct engagement,’ but I am pretty sure I have said ‘ask and answer direct questions.’ That being said, we are having a discussion, exchanging views and we are asking and answering direct questions from one another. Is this such a bad thing? We are engaged and are having a discussion. Yes, I am prepared to agree, as well as, say when I am wrong. I have done so in the past right here on MM’s blog. And, turn about is fair play, are you willing to display your own viewpoint and acknowledging its weaknesses?

BTW, thank you for responding as you have, and at length. It is beyond frustrating having someone write something (throw a bomb or insult you) and then scurry away.

OK, getting back in the saddle. Ooops, snark.

Why would you ask if I am unwilling to hear others out? Haven’t I cut and pasted your words and responded directly to your questions? I am reading every word you write (say).

On November 3rd, 2009 at 3:21 pm, emjem24 said:

You’re the one who makes “leaps” in logic… I’m sure you can picture it. If not, I’ll do your work for you. Basically, the tea partiers are as bad as the Saul Alinsky practioners. Or, we should exhibit those tendencies to our advantage.

Please cut and paste where I said that. If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion.

Again, protesting is protesting and it includes, but is not limited to Agitating, Aggravating, Educating and Organizing. What you are protesting or advancing as a goal is another thing. I hope you do not think protesting is a bad thing. Do you? When that first bag of tea went into Boston Harbor, it was a protest. Was that a bad thing?

You don’t know? I thought you had the Tea Party movement all figured out.

Yep, I do not know whether children are being brainwashed. Though I hope everyone is teaching their children. Don’t you? And, why would you think I had the Tea Party all figured out? Because, I understand that they are against too much spending and big Government? I am sure there is more to it, though I have hit only what I believe to be the major points. You got more, let me hear them.

I was actually talking about ACORN and home loan shakedown artists. Michelle has taken great pains to illustrate this. It’s in the press. I was simply asking if the Tea Party was doing this too.

Hmmm, this is interesting, and instructive. A leap I did not take. It is easy not leaping. You had ACORN in mind and I never assumed, asserted or accused you of that. You should re-read your question, and of course my answer. You asked about Tea Partiers and not ACORN. You asked a direct question and I gave you a direct response. Had you asked about ACORN, my answer would, of course, have been different. Since it was your words, I can be confident that you will not accuse me of twisting them.

I cannot be held accountable for what you were thinking, and did not write. Nor can I be held accountable for organizations that I never heard of. And, I would not hold you accountable, either.

They “shouted down” people? Or did they protest politicians who don’t share the public’s concerns? Yes, those Tea Partiers are “mean” people.

Yep, they shouted down people. And, yes they protested politicians. Both things happened. Sometimes both happened at the same time. Shouting down people is a form of protest. Do you agree?

Why would you say that Tea Partiers are “mean” people? Are you thinking something and not telling me? See, no leaping. Just asking a question so that I may better understand you.

Of course you don’t. This is about your animus toward conservatives and their “hypocrisy.” You would actually have to ask tea partiers, such as the ones on this blog, for their insight. You’re not interested in that.

HUH? What animus? I am going to do it again. Cut and paste where I have said or suggested anything like that. If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion.

Hypocrisy, is too strong a word and solicits far too much emotion. I prefer the word consistency, and it is more accurate. If you don’t like big Government or too much spending, then go after all of it. Not just some of it. Be consistent.

And, how do you know what I am interested in? By what I am not talking about? By what I am not asking about? The logic escapes me.

Evidence? Or is this a leap in logic?

This is your own assertion. I have not heard ANY tea partier advocating for or against government programs. They simply want government to get out of their business. You have asserted that if people want to protest government, they should advocate for government program elimination. Of course, you’re not aware of what the tea partiers advocate or don’t advocate because you’re not involved in the movement and aren’t interested in what they’re saying.

Yep, it is my own personal observation. From what has been provided by MM, and elsewhere. Of everything MM has presented, not one instance exists where a Tea Partier has said, shut down Medicare because it is too big and spends too much money. I do recall mentions of getting rid of the Dept of Education. Yes, in this regard, I am consistent. If you protest big Government, then all big Government should be protested. If you protest too much spending, then all too much spending should be protested. Are you consistent? Are Tea Partiers consistent?

You have not heard a Tea Partier advocating for or against Government programs? Are you sure? What is the Tea Partier’s position on H.R. 3200?

How would you know what I am interested in? How do you know what I am involved in, or not involved in?

Why is the onus on me? You’re the one who made the assertion that the tea partiers are advocating for the preservation of government programs, YOU put up the link. This is your pet peeve. Not mine.

The onus is not on you. If you can’t answer a question, just say so. And no, I made no such assertion. I made a statement, based on my personal observations, that Tea Partiers were not advocating for the elimination of all big Government or ending too much spending.

Sure there is. You’re either saying that the tea partiers are as bad as Saul Alinksy practictioners or you’re advocating that they use his tactics. Which one is it?

Hip hip hooray! I think you finally got it. I am saying the latter. I have always said the latter. I have never said the former. Yep, it is OK and a good thing to use practices and tactics that work. Who cares where the tactics come from, or who uses them? Tactics are tactics. And, goals are goals. Goals and tactics are separate and distinct. A protester of any sort can use tactics of any sort, and that does not make their goals the same.

You asked the question in your own words, and I hope you understand the answer. Yes, I am advocating that the tactics that work for protesters be used, no matter who else uses those same tactics.

Yes, use the tactics of Alinsky, but not his goals.

You are comparing the tea partiers to the Saul Alinsky practioners. You ARE asserting that they’re hypocrites and are as bad as the far left. I have nothing in common with the LEFT but I DO know how they operate. Their tactics are not OUR tactics. Then again, you look down on the tea partiers as hypocrites and as bad as the far left zealots so you will continue to treat them with disdain.

Nope. Never have compared Tea Partiers to Alinsky practitioners. And I have never mentioned the word ‘left’ in this thread. I have said that they shared the same tactics though.

Nope, If anything I am asking if they are consistent and not hypocrites.

Cut and paste where I have treated tea partiers with disdain, or looked down on them? If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion.

Yes, you are making a false comparison. People employ different strategies to be heard. However, movements are organic and don’t always grow out of studying the opposition’s techniques. If you cannot recognize that the tea party movement is as much a local, organic awakening as much as it is a national awakening, I can’t convince you otherwise.

Yes, I agree, people employ different strategies to be heard. Who suggested that anyone study anything? Why can’t the Tea Patier’s form of protest be organic, too. We have had a fair amount of protesting in the country and there is a baseline of experience to draw from. Marching, speeches, signs, songs, bull horns, leaflets, costumes, etc. Protesters of all stripes have employed similar tactics over the years.

You do not have to convince me of anything, but it would be helpful if you would ask what I thought about where the Tea Party movement comes from.

I do not favor using Saul Alinsky’s tactics and I don’t think tea party participants do either. This is a movement that grew organically with no formal organization unlike organizations like ACORN which enjoy a level of formal political support by the likes of the Dem party.

OK, you do not favor using Alinsky’s tactics, though his tactics are used by the Tea Partiers. OK, the Tea Party movement has grown organically.

I think your questions do not reflect a sincere attempt to understand the tea party movement. You would rather coopt it like the Repubs by introducing radical tactics like Saul Alinsky’s into the mix. Then again, this was never even about the original topic, only a diversion you’ve set up to introduce an alternate scenario that doesn’t have anything to do with the tea party movement to begin with.

The questions were meant to understand how much you agree with the tactics that Alinsky uses. And, you agree with quite a few of them. Alinsky has thirteen items, I asked you about eleven. See Post #834018. It has everything to do with the tactics that work for the Tea Partiers, and that work for protesters in general. Using the same tactics as someone else does not mean you agree with the positions of the other people that uses the same tactics.

If you are being sincere, I’m not seeing it. If you want Saul Alinsky’s tactics to be used by the movement, I’d rather people like you just stand on the sidelines and laugh, deride, or point fingers. You’re good at that. Not so good at making an actual point.

Bottomline, if the Tea Partiers are using tactics that work, and even if those tactics were used by Alinski, more power to the Tea Partiers. Yep, the Tea Partiers should educate. Yep, the Tea Partiers should organize. Yep, the Tea Partiers should agitate. And, yep the Tea Partiers should aggravate.

And, how would you know what I am good at?

(Just for the fun of it, do you have a sense of humor? This is not a leap, just a question.)

Please cut and paste an example of your ‘guess’ as how you know what I am good at. Thought I was going to say ‘assertion,’ didn’t you? If you find anything like that I will apologize. If you can’t, I hope you apologize, or you will at least retract your assertion, and . . . ‘guess.’

http://www.radicalteacher.org/recent.asp

On November 2nd, 2009 at 9:47 am, chapoutier said:

I should add that on occasion I still run into a former gym teacher-who no longer acknowledges me when she sees me-because since I’m an unapologetic conservative I’m not worth speaking to.

She probably assumes you hate lesbians.

Another assumption is that all female gym teachers are lesbians.

Assumption is the mother of all screwups.

zyzzyg said:

Exactly where is ‘there’? Be specific.

You’re the one who makes “leaps” in logic… I’m sure you can picture it. If not, I’ll do your work for you. Basically, the tea partiers are as bad as the Saul Alinsky practioners. Or, we should exhibit those tendencies to our advantage.

I don’t know.

You don’t know? I thought you had the Tea Party movement all figured out.

I have not seen anything like that in the press.

I was actually talking about ACORN and home loan shakedown artists. Michelle has taken great pains to illustrate this. It’s in the press. I was simply asking if the Tea Party was doing this too.

Aside from shouting down people in Town Hall meetings who disagree with them, probaly not.

They “shouted down” people? Or did they protest politicians who don’t share the public’s concerns? Yes, those Tea Partiers are “mean” people.

I have no idea. I thought the tea partiers were all about the excessive size of Government and too much spending.

Of course you don’t. This is about your animus toward conservatives and their “hypocrisy.” You would actually have to ask tea partiers, such as the ones on this blog, for their insight. You’re not interested in that.

However, tea partiers support large Government programs like Medicare, Medicaid, commodity subsidies (e.g., sugar, milk, farm supports, flood insurance, etc.), Social Security, regional airports, non-Constitutional entities like SEC, FDIC, PGC, USDA, OSHA, EPA, etc.

Evidence? Or is this a leap in logic?

I have not seen, or heard, any tea partiers say they want those programs canceled. Of course, my not being aware of it does not mean the tea partiers have not called for their abolition.

This is your own assertion. I have not heard ANY tea partier advocating for or against government programs. They simply want government to get out of their business. You have asserted that if people want to protest government, they should advocate for government program elimination. Of course, you’re not aware of what the tea partiers advocate or don’t advocate because you’re not involved in the movement and aren’t interested in what they’re saying.

If you have a link where the abolition of Medicare (or, any of the large Government programs mentioned above) is called for, please provide a link.

Why is the onus on me? You’re the one who made the assertion that the tea partiers are advocating for the preservation of government programs, YOU put up the link. This is your pet peeve. Not mine.

Exactly what am I comparing? There is no dichotomy.

Sure there is. You’re either saying that the tea partiers are as bad as Saul Alinksy practictioners or you’re advocating that they use his tactics. Which one is it?

In war, if your enemy is using snipers, will you not use snipers, too. Am I comparing you to your enemy, or am I saying that the tactics your enemies uses, are tactics that you can use too?

You are comparing the tea partiers to the Saul Alinsky practioners. You ARE asserting that they’re hypocrites and are as bad as the far left. I have nothing in common with the LEFT but I DO know how they operate. Their tactics are not OUR tactics. Then again, you look down on the tea partiers as hypocrites and as bad as the far left zealots so you will continue to treat them with disdain.

Am I comparing Alinsky to tea partiers, or am I saying that the tactics used to advance each of their respective positons, are the same?

Yes, you are making a false comparison. People employ different strategies to be heard. However, movements are organic and don’t always grow out of studying the opposition’s techniques. If you cannot recognize that the tea party movement is as much a local, organic awakening as much as it is a national awakening, I can’t convince you otherwise.

Here are a few questions for you -

1. Should the tea partiers project their power beyond what their opposition thinks they have?

No. Since much of the movement grew locally, much of what the tea partiers are concerned with has to do with how the national circumstances are affecting them in a local and state way. This has nothing to do with the Dems but rather the abuse of power by both parties. You would know that if you were sincerely interested in getting to know how the movement was started.

2. Should the tea partiers invoke non-American ideas to present their arguement? Should the tea partiers go outside the American experience to achieve their goals?

No. This is an organic, AMERICAN movement. It draws from the ideas of the founders (such as the 9/12ers) and the ideas set out in the Constitution. Nowhere have I seen it suggested, that they’re drawing from other movements from other countries. Where are you going with this?

3. Should the tea partiers take advantage of their oppositions lack of experience?

Since a lot of their opposition grew up in the 60′s organizing against the Vietnam War, racism, sexism, etc., I think the opposition has PLENTY of experience. Again, where are you going with this?

4. Should the tea partiers compell their opposition to follow the rules and have changes come to a vote?

Yes. However, if the election system is being manipulated NATIONALLY, then change has to come in local and state elections. Since we are a Republic, tea partiers want the opposition to STOP inducing change nationally and let it happen LOCALLY.

5. Should the tea partiers make signs that make fun of their opposition?

If they are pertinent to the situation. Where are you going here?

6. Should the tea partiers enjoy their efforts and remain in good spirits?

This isn’t a party. Many tea partiers have rearranged their schedules, sacrificed time with their families, friends, and at work to be part of this movement. It isn’t a party…. what is your point?

7. Should the tea partiers seek immediate impact from their efforts?

Since many want to throw the bums out from both parties that’s a given.

8. Should the tea partiers keep the pressure on their opponents?

This is a given. Are you being serious?

9. Should the tea partiers use their image to advance their agenda?

Yes. Again, what is your point? Sometimes, the only way to get the message out is media exposure and attention. It has nothing to do with a “packaged” image.

10. Should the tea partiers continue their efforts? Should the tea partiers maintain constant pressure upon the opposition?

You’ve already asked this question and I’ve answered.

11. Should the tea partiers pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it?

I do not favor using Saul Alinsky’s tactics and I don’t think tea party participants do either. This is a movement that grew organically with no formal organization unlike organizations like ACORN which enjoy a level of formal political support by the likes of the Dem party.

I think your questions do not reflect a sincere attempt to understand the tea party movement. You would rather coopt it like the Repubs by introducing radical tactics like Saul Alinsky’s into the mix. Then again, this was never even about the original topic, only a diversion you’ve set up to introduce an alternate scenario that doesn’t have anything to do with the tea party movement to begin with.

If you are being sincere, I’m not seeing it. If you want Saul Alinsky’s tactics to be used by the movement, I’d rather people like you just stand on the sidelines and laugh, deride, or point fingers. You’re good at that. Not so good at making an actual point.

zyzzyg said:

Exactly where did I ever say that? You are assuming facts not in evidence. Yep, you are misrepresenting the truth.

Really? Poor, zyzzyg, it must be so hard to continue on this blog with that victim complex and belief that everything you say is “misrepresented.” We could discuss the many times you’ve made “leaps” in logic. I guess that’s one of your “facts” not in evidence.

I have never even heard of the Rouge Forum, so how is it possible for me to see any similarities between them and any other group?

Of course you haven’t. Not many Americans have except those associated with the education field. Perhaps, if you actually went on their website and gained an insight in the similarities between them and other far-left groups you wouldn’t be making leaps in logic like you’ve done on this topic.

Slow down. Stop making unsubstantiated assertions, and simply rely on the facts. You do not know what is the same in my eyes.

Oohhh… I’m just taking a page out of your own blogging handbook, Zyzzyg. Facts are wonderful things… perhaps you should become acquainted with them as well since you’ve “misrepresented” the goals of the teaparty movement. I could care less what is the “same in your own eyes” because you’ve proven time and time again that not only are you not willing to
hear out conservatives you’re just as “entrenched” as you think “we” are.

Of course, I do not have any freaking clue about the Rouge Foundation. I have never heard of them before you mentioned them.

It’s Rouge Forum. Of course you don’t. You let other people do your research for you. The internet is a beautiful thing. Perhaps, you should broaden your horizons?

They sound like a radical anarchists group of make-up and cosmetic artists, running around with lipstick, eyeliner and powder puffs redecorating people’s faces. Are they?

And you wonder why people have a beef with you? Was this necessary? If you’re going to be disrespectful, then why bother responding? What is your problem?

I’m simply illustrating the weakness in your argument in comparing tactics or advocating similar tactics be used on the conservative, grassroots side. Is this the “direct engagement” you speak of? Are you simply unwilling to hear out others? Or are you only willing to display your own viewpoint without acknowledging its weaknesses?

On November 2nd, 2009 at 4:19 pm, emjem24 said: #834305

However, according to zyzzyg, we have more to worry about from the likes of Tea Party activists than those who participate in the Rouge Forum. They’re both the same in his eyes.

Exactly where did I ever say that? You are assuming facts not in evidence. Yep, you are misrepresenting the truth.

I have never even heard of the Rouge Forum, so how is it possible for me to see any similarities between them and any other group?

Slow down. Stop making unsubstantiated assertions, and simply rely on the facts. You do not know what is the same in my eyes.

They’re not. Until you’ve actually experienced interaction with the participants of such groups, people like zyzzyg have no freaking clue. None.

Of course, I do not have any freaking clue about the Rouge Foundation. I have never heard of them before you mentioned them.

They sound like a radical anarchists group of make-up and cosmetic artists, running around with lipstick, eyeliner and powder puffs redecorating people’s faces. Are they?

On November 2nd, 2009 at 4:12 pm, emjem24 said: #834300

Really? Really? Are you really going to go there?

Exactly where is ‘there’? Be specific.

Here’s a few questions for you:

1. Does the tea party believe in brainwashing the youth?

I don’t know.

2. Does the tea party believe in strong-arm tactics like harassing bankers’ families and companys’ board members to get what they want?

I have not seen anything like that in the press.

3. Does the tea party believe in stifling free speech by those they disagree with?

Aside from shouting down people in Town Hall meetings who disagree with them, probaly not.

4. Does the tea party believe that entitlements are the way to freedom?

I have no idea. I thought the tea partiers were all about the excessive size of Government and too much spending.

However, tea partiers support large Government programs like Medicare, Medicaid, commodity subsidies (e.g., sugar, milk, farm supports, flood insurance, etc.), Social Security, regional airports, non-Constitutional entities like SEC, FDIC, PGC, USDA, OSHA, EPA, etc.

I have not seen, or heard, any tea partiers say they want those programs canceled. Of course, my not being aware of it does not mean the tea partiers have not called for their abolition.

If you have a link where the abolition of Medicare (or, any of the large Government programs mentioned above) is called for, please provide a link.

I cannot seriously believe you’re going there. Another false dichotomy, by you, using illogical comparative methodology.

Exactly what am I comparing? There is no dichotomy.

In war, if your enemy is using snipers, will you not use snipers, too. Am I comparing you to your enemy, or am I saying that the tactics your enemies uses, are tactics that you can use too?

Am I comparing Alinsky to tea partiers, or am I saying that the tactics used to advance each of their respective positons, are the same?

Here are a few questions for you -

1. Should the tea partiers project their power beyond what their opposition thinks they have?

2. Should the tea partiers invoke non-American ideas to present their arguement? Should the tea partiers go outside the American experience to achieve their goals?

3. Should the tea partiers take advantage of their oppositions lack of experience?

4. Should the tea partiers compell their opposition to follow the rules and have changes come to a vote?

5. Should the tea partiers make signs that make fun of their opposition?

6. Should the tea partiers enjoy their efforts and remain in good spirits?

7. Should the tea partiers seek immediate impact from their efforts?

8. Should the tea partiers keep the pressure on their opponents?

9. Should the tea partiers use their image to advance their agenda?

10. Should the tea partiers continue their efforts? Should the tea partiers maintain constant pressure upon the opposition?

11. Should the tea partiers pick a target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it?

englishqueen01 said:

What tea partiers have blown themselves up while planning murder?

Oh, don’t take him seriously. He’s just P-O’d that we’re using their tactics against them and their beloved messiah.

As someone who’s studying to be a teacher – are their conservative teacher’s unions out there? If not, I vow never to fall for this insanity.

As a former teacher myself, there are no conservative teachers unions that I know of. Most teachers are of a liberal bent in my experience.

I don’t mean to burst your bubble, but I would really be cautious about entering the teaching profession right now. There are more teachers than teaching jobs out there. We actually have a teacher surplus right now. It really depends on what field you go in.

The competition is stiff for jobs. Sites like teachers.net, which I highly recommend, really go into what is going on right now in teaching. I substitute taught for 5 years, hoping that if I got my foot in the door that way it would make a difference or impression. It didn’t. Please don’t make the mistake of subbing. Whatever joy you have now for teaching will quickly dissipate.

Are you going after your BA or Masters? A quick warning: schools are hiring the BA recipients rather than the Masters recipients because of the union-decreed payscale. They’d rather hire a BA recipient whose pay is less than a Master’s recipient.

I’m taking a break from teaching. I’m a social studies teacher by trade, but given there are more social studies teachers than jobs out there, I’ve had to make alternate plans. Being a military spouse hasn’t helped in my career progression. I’ve resorted to going back to the private sector as an administrative assistant, which has paid me more than I’ll ever make as a lowly sub.

Good luck to you. I hope you have better luck than I did.

There’s a group known as the Rouge Forum that my graduate advisor continually pushed on my class as a way of addressing social, racial, and economic “inequities” in the education system. Unfortunately, what he “failed” to disclose is how far-left, and Communist this group’s bent actually was.

Look it up. It’s a trip. It’s a study in the kind of people who inhabit the various education schools that prepare new crops of teachers across the country.

However, according to zyzzyg, we have more to worry about from the likes of Tea Party activists than those who participate in the Rouge Forum. They’re both the same in his eyes.

They’re not. Until you’ve actually experienced interaction with the participants of such groups, people like zyzzyg have no freaking clue. None.

I got my Masters degree but also learned the kind of crazy that inhabits the Rouge Forum and the types of people that are educating future teachers. It’s scary….