Politics in 2nd grade class room.

[JettaKnight]

So who did he not vote for?

Can't you read? He said "(so and so)" .

I didn't vote for them either.


There's times I miss 88GT, then threads like these remind of why I don't miss her.

 

[HoughMade]

Set the 'Way Back Machine' to when I was in grade school. On the big bulletin board in the school cafeteria was the Goldwater v Johnson contest. This kind of stuff has been going on for ever, nothing really new.

When I was in 4th Grade, we had a mock election- this was 1980. Carter trounced Reagan in Mrs. Williams' class. Myself and a few right minded kids were Reagan supporters.

By 6th grade, there was some kind of anti-nuke, pro-disarmament movement in the school encouraged by many teachers. As I recall, I was the only pro-nuke kid to be found. had the country followed this dim-witted path, the early '90s would have been vastly different in eastern Europe.

 

[IndyDave1776]

No offense chaps, but if your kid's political views are solidified by a substitute teacher, you're not doing your job as a parent.

That's not to say the concerns aren't valid, only that we as parents have much more exposure to our children. As a Dad, I have the responsibility and opportunity to teach my children critical thinking skills.

It's not a responsibility I take lightly.

You have a valid point about it being a parent's responsibility to stay in front of the other influences affecting their children, but it is also important to remember that most teachers will try to angle for the same sub every time if they find someone that works out to their liking, generally forming that opinion based on the way things look on paper when they return. As a result, it is not likely that this was a one-time drive-by but rather something that happened with a sub who was familiar enough to have been assigned some measure of credibility by the youngster.

 

[bwframe]

It should be against the law for a unionized public servant to "teach" their political opinion.

 

[trucker777]

It should be against the law for a unionized public servant to "teach" their political opinion.

Amen to that!

 

[steveh_131]

Reason #1,038,746 why we opt out of public education.

 

[trucker777]

When I was in 4th Grade, we had a mock election- this was 1980. Carter trounced Reagan in Mrs. Williams' class. Myself and a few right minded kids were Reagan supporters.

By 6th grade, there was some kind of anti-nuke, pro-disarmament movement in the school encouraged by many teachers. As I recall, I was the only pro-nuke kid to be found. had the country followed this dim-witted path, the early '90s would have been vastly different in eastern Europe.

I recall having a similar experience in the late 80's

 

[Lowe0]

It should be against the law for a unionized public servant to "teach" their political opinion.

I feel that way every time I see a "teach the controversy" bill.

 

[hopper68]

For the adults, I'll place a different challenge here: There is a quiz located at The BBHQ Great American Civics Quiz that I'd like to see how people do completing. You are on the honor system that you won't look up answers to artificially inflate your scores. Be aware that this quiz has some very easy and some very difficult questions. (ETA: and one wrong answer as well, at this writing.)


Blessings,
Bill

44, I clicked wrong should have been 45

 

[KJQ6945]

I got a 47. I left out a first name, and I got the correct answer to the one they have the wrong answer for.

 

[Dosproduction]

bill of rights its all good I took the test. Some are hard on there others not so bad. I did look up the magna carta year cause I had no idea when that was. And I was worried about my spelling since I suck at that. As for bwframe I don't care if they are union or not. There job is to teach certain things that are facts. Not give there opinions. Union or not is irrelevant. All americans have the right to associate with who ever they like including unions.

 

[Lowe0]

For the adults, I'll place a different challenge here: There is a quiz located at The BBHQ Great American Civics Quiz that I'd like to see how people do completing. You are on the honor system that you won't look up answers to artificially inflate your scores. Be aware that this quiz has some very easy and some very difficult questions. (ETA: and one wrong answer as well, at this writing.)

47. Misread 1900s as 1990s (and answered zero), and disagree with them on question 10 (Congress does have the authority to overrule the Supreme Court, by sending an Amendment to the Constitution to the states to be ratified).

 

[jdmack79]

51 Too bad the Attorney General question is wrong or I would have had 52.

 

[Bill of Rights]

47. Misread 1900s as 1990s (and answered zero), and disagree with them on question 10 (Congress does have the authority to overrule the Supreme Court, by sending an Amendment to the Constitution to the states to be ratified).

I would disagree. The Congress can ASK the People to overrule SCOTUS, but cannot do the overruling themselves, as they can the President's veto.

I legitimately missed #28, as I didn't know that person's name. Full disclosure, though, I have taken it before, and I have a good memory for things like question #99.

 

[HoughMade]

#23 is wrong. The U.S. does have its own supply of money.

 

[rhino]

It should be against the law for a unionized public servant to "teach" their political opinion.

I submit that doing so is functionally identical to proselytizing for their religion.

 

[Bill of Rights]

#23 is wrong. The U.S. does have its own supply of money.

The government does not, however. The "Federal Reserve Bank" is not a government entity, as you know. Further, if the gov't had its own supply of money, why would they need to continue to take OUR money, which we have to work to earn?

 

[bobzilla]

mY wife's a teacher. She hates being inundated with the constant liberal barage of of the other teachers, the union and the staff.

 

[HoughMade]

The government does not, however. The "Federal Reserve Bank" is not a government entity, as you know. Further, if the gov't had its own supply of money, why would they need to continue to take OUR money, which we have to work to earn?

The U.S. government has sources of money other than taxes. The question asked if the government had its own supply of money. It does. Further, saying taxes that are paid into the U.S. Treasury are not the government's supply of money is like saying that when you get paid, the money you put in the bank isn't your money.

 

[bwframe]

It should be against the law for a unionized public servant to "teach" their political opinion.

I submit that doing so is functionally identical to proselytizing for their religion.

Correct!