Common Core-In Your Schools

[Ifly2]

Yes, Math and English. It's imperative that we teach our children a new English language with new expressions to explain how balancing a national checkbook can't possibly lead to economic destruction for all. Math problem: how do you cover 32 million uninsured people for a mere 980 million dollars? Easy. Sell it with new English and Math by lying out our ass. Simple huh?

First, did I answer your questions, or criticisms?

No response, just wondered.

Second, what does your response quoted here have to do with anything I said, or CC?

Third, would you Care to substantiate your claim? There are "new expressions" to explain fiscal policy? Any examples?

Seriously?

 

[Ifly2]

"I'm amused by your slurs and slanders as a deception from your total lack of knowledge of the issue."


From the undisputed king of slurs and slanders on this MB, and the regular winner of the race to be the lowest common denominator, on topic after topic, we have this bit of blatant hypocrisy.

Not surprising, really.

I played nice a long time, trying to have respectful discussions about the actual issues.

However, it Seems that a little hyperbole is called for around here.

Btw, however much you insist, I am not Dave.

 

[delldude]

"....the program is becoming a dismal failure in many states already....."

And the evidence, or Substantiation, for your claim is...?

Please don't say Mommy Roth, Rush, or xxxx. Said so....

Playing the Dave game is fun.....

I believe you told me in another thread:

"Do your own homework".

 

[delldude]

From the undisputed king of slurs and slanders on this MB, and the regular winner of the race to be the lowest common denominator, on topic after topic, we have this bit of blatant hypocrisy.

You got me confused with Bears.....Dave

 

[Knotbuyinit]

First, did I answer your questions, or criticisms?

No response, just wondered.

Second, what does your response quoted here have to do with anything I said, or CC?

Third, would you Care to substantiate your claim? There are "new expressions" to explain fiscal policy? Any examples?

Seriously?

My bet is you will not understand, there's no under/over.

 

[Ifly2]

Non answer

Because there is not one to back up your claim, either.

All you have is fear, and a deep "understanding" that "those people" are "doing something bad".

Not one word of actual discussion, nothing to support the claims you make, not even an attempt at cut and paste, after you chided me on my writing style.

Move along folks....

 

[delldude]

Terrorist Professor Bill Ayers and Obama’s Federal School Curriculum


Three years after the Department of Education announced a contest called Race-to-the-Top for $4.35 billion in stimulus funds, some parents, teachers, governors, and citizen and public policy groups are coming to an awful realization about the likely outcomes:

• A national curriculum called Common Core
• Regionalism, or the replacement of local governments by federally appointed bureaucrats
• A leveling of all schools to one, low national standard, and a redistribution of education funds among school districts
• An effective federal tracking of all students
• The loss of the option of avoiding the national curriculum and tests through private school and home school

Working behind the scenes, implementing these policies and writing the standards are associates from President Obama’s community organizing days. In de facto control of the education component is Linda Darling-Hammond, a radical left-wing educator and close colleague of William “Bill” Ayers, the former leader of the communist terrorist Weather Underground who became a professor of education and friend of Obama’s.
When these dangerous initiatives are implemented, there will be no escaping bad schools and a radical curriculum by moving to a good suburb, or by home schooling, or by enrolling your children in private schools.
How was it that 48 governors entered Race-to-the-Top without knowing outcomes?
It was one of the many “crises” exploited by the Obama administration. While the public was focused on a series of radical moves coming in rapid-fire succession, like the health care bill and proposed trials and imprisonment of 9/11 terrorists on domestic soil, governors, worried about keeping school doors open, signed on. Many politicians and pundits praised Obama on this singular issue, repeating the official rhetoric about raising standards.

APPENDIX: THE GATES FOUNDATION

McGroarty and Robbins note that the Gates Foundation “has poured tens of millions of dollars into organizations that have an interest, financial or otherwise, in the implementation of Common Core.”[xiii] While the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation gives to worthy causes like fighting malaria and HIV infection, the foundation’s 2010 IRS documents reveal funding of other, mostly leftist, causes. Gifts went to the Tides Fund, and Planned Parenthood and other “reproductive health” efforts. In education, Gates has given money to teachers unions, La Raza schools, and a school named after Caesar Chavez.
They have given a lot to school districts. After Bill Gates met with the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, reporter Jaime Sarrio gushed about Gates’ generosity: a $20 million investment in “game-based learning,” technical support in Georgia’s Race to the Top application, a gift of $500,000 for teachers to meet the standards of Common Core, and $10 million for Atlanta public schools’ “Effective Teacher in Every Classroom” program.
Florida schools received a substantial portion of education funding.
In 2010, the Gates Foundation gave millions to a number of developers of “game-based learning” and “digital learning.” Gates is also helping companies that will evaluate teacher effectiveness, like Teachscape. Among Teachscape’s business partners are the testing company ETS and the National Education Association. Teachscape’s founder is on the board of Oracle, a company that advertises itself as teaching “21[sup]st[/sup] century skills.” Oracle donated money to Teachscape. Another business partner of Teachscape, Leaning Forward, will hold a conference in December, sponsored by the Gates Foundation. Presenters will offer their companies’ and their schools’ advice on using technology to implement Common Core. Session topics fall into categories like “Brain-Based Learning” and “Race, Class, Culture, and Learning Differences.”
Gates also gave millions to projects on “data collection” programs that track teacher and student progress.
The Gates Foundation supported efforts to market Common Core through media “education.” The Corporation for Public Broadcasting received half a million dollars to “identify and amplify ‘teacher voice’ to help ensure teachers are in the center of the dialogue on teacher accountability” (nothing for parent or citizen voice, though). NPR received $250,000 “to support coverage of education issues.” The Education Writers Association received $603,900 “to enhance media coverage of high school and post-secondary education by offering seminars and online training for reporters building bridges between mainstream and ethnic community media,” and $23,634 to “support media coverage of the education components of American Recovery and Reconstruction Act.”
The Gates Foundation provided a $489,453 grant to the George Soros/Obama mouthpiece, the Center for American Progress, “to help communicate the importance of education reforms and support progressive states seeking to implement them.” The same year CAP was also awarded $302,680 to “enhance degree completion for low-income young adults through the publishing of new policy papers, stakeholder engagement and media outreach.” Over $1 million was given to the Editorial Projects in Education, which publishes Education Week, which is supported by other foundations favoring Common Core. Education Week published the Darling-Hammond article promoting new assessments. Stephen Diamond in an October 9, 2008, blog post complained that Education Week was “whitewashing” Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers in the Annenberg Challenge.
Universities across the country received grants to promote Common Core, as did Boards of Regents. Columbia Teachers College, Ayers’ alma mater, and place of employment for Lucy Calkins, was a major beneficiary.
Gates’ efforts are aligned with the federal government’s, of making reparations, as it were, by allocating money to low-income and minority students and making them “college-ready.” Such allocations are quite frequent in the tax return.
But critics worry that equalization will be achieved by lowering standards. None of the education non-profits funded by Gates are dedicated to raising standards through a rigorous, traditional curriculum, or by promoting Western or American principles. As Heather Crossin and Jane Robbins point out, realistically, the idea of universal college-readiness can be met only by lowering standards. Some Common Core advocates have admitted that this is the case.

http://www.aim.org/s...ool-curriculum/

President Obama and Education

President Obama and Education Secretary Arne Duncan often say that the Common Core standards were developed by the states and voluntarily adopted by them. This is not true. They were developed by an organization called Achieve and the National Governors Association, both of which were generously funded by the Gates Foundation. There was minimal public engagement in the development of the Common Core.
Their creation was neither grassroots nor did it emanate from the states. ​In fact, it was well understood by states that they would not be eligible for Race to the Top funding ($4.35 billion) unless they adopted the Common Core standards. Federal law prohibits the U.S. Department of Education from prescribing any curriculum, but in this case the Department figured out a clever way to evade the letter of the law. Forty-six states and the District of Columbia signed on, not because the Common Core standards were better than their own, but because they wanted a share of the federal cash. In some cases, the Common Core standards really were better than the state standards, but in Massachusetts, for example, the state standards were superior and well tested but were ditched anyway and replaced with the Common Core.
The former Texas state commissioner of education, Robert Scott, has stated for the record that he was urged to adopt the Common Core standards before they were written.

http://www.washingto...ndards-ravitch/

 

[Ifly2]

I get it already

We all do

You don't like Obama, anything on the left, or anyone or anything that can somehow, anyhow, be associated with them.

You are willing to take as Gospel and regurgitate any thing any one from the "right" says.

You are also willing to take any issue, and make it all about a way to discredit the above parties.

I will give you credit for finally posting something that somewhat focuses on the actual issues, and even " sounds " a little bit more reasoned and moderate, even though the authors couldn't help drawing a link to Ayers that has nothing to do with the story, other than drawing the expected visceral reaction, and attaching it to CC. Old, and still dishonest, tactic of the establishment.

At least it was not as completely chock full of lies as the OP.

Or your earlier claims.

 

[delldude]

That's because from where I sit, your favorites are running the country into the ground.

What was it your God Obama said?

Fundamentally change?

MICHELLE OBAMA:

"Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices; we are going to have to change our conversation; we're going to have to change our traditions, our history; we're going to have to move into a different place as a nation."

Change our traditions and change our history. What did she mean by that? I think we are starting to see it.
Changing history means not just telling the same old tall tales of the free market system and the Founders. No, it's the history according to progressives. And it's not merely spinning the old facts; it's taking current events and molding them to fit the progressive agenda and, in this case, completely ignoring history.

And where does one start to make these fundamental changes?

K-12....welcome to fundamental change ala obama.

 

[Ifly2]

On the first, we obviously disagree.

Difference is, I don't go digging for outlandish hyper political fantasy fear pieces to post on public message boards.

I suppose there are some out there, I wouldn't know where to find them.

Second, Obama is not my god. Or a god. Or God. Or any god. I don't believe that he wants to be, or that anyone thinks he is.

He was merely, but certainly, the best candidate for president we were offered during the last two elections.

Not my first choice, but the only real choice.

~47% of the voters disagree with me.

That's how that works, since we got sucked into a two party system.


BTW, as much as y'all try, it isn't all about Obama, and, given that we did have a valid election, the constitutionally mandated function of Congress is to attend to the affairs of the country-not to concentrate solely on destroying the Obama presidency.

They said it, not me.

But that is one reason none of them will ever get my vote again.

 

[delldude]

Obama is only the face, Dude.....
You'll never realize what that's about anyway...or admit to it.












Ate my first and last pomegranate of my life tonight.

 

[Ifly2]

Obama is only the face, Dude.....
You'll never realize what that's about anyway...or admit to it.




Same was true of Bush, Reagan, etal

And would have been of McCain or Romney

I said that all along

It is y'all that attach Obama to every thing









Ate my first and last pomegranate of my life tonight.

 

[southwind]

I get it already

We all do

You don't like Obama, anything on the left, or anyone or anything that can somehow, anyhow, be associated with them.

You are willing to take as Gospel and regurgitate any thing any one from the "right" says.

You are also willing to take any issue, and make it all about a way to discredit the above parties.

I will give you credit for finally posting something that somewhat focuses on the actual issues, and even " sounds " a little bit more reasoned and moderate, even though the authors couldn't help drawing a link to Ayers that has nothing to do with the story, other than drawing the expected visceral reaction, and attaching it to CC. Old, and still dishonest, tactic of the establishment.

At least it was not as completely chock full of lies as the OP.

Or your earlier claims.

Yep! BaRack pretty much SUCKS at being POTUS !

Think when it's all said and done, he'll be giving Carter a run for the money, as being worst POTUS, ever !

 

[Ifly2]

I only remember back to Nixon

Bush II is going to be real difficult to surpass for worst, tho I suspect McCain would have made it close. Sure a good thing we dodged that bullet.

Roger Ailes' product, a Nixon that was electable in the TV age - Lots there to be proud of.

Real proud.

Good job for the country there Roger. Thank you not.

Actually, in various rankings, Obama ranges between 8th and 15th.

Rankings usually improve after they leave office

 

[delldude]

I only remember back to Nixon

Bush II is going to be real difficult to surpass for worst, tho I suspect McCain would have made it close. Sure a good thing we dodged that bullet.

Roger Ailes' product, a Nixon that was electable in the TV age - Lots there to be proud of.

Real proud.

Good job for the country there Roger. Thank you not.

Actually, in various rankings, Obama ranges between 8th and 15th.

Rankings usually improve after they leave office

There’s an Obama Page on Facebook that has over 131, 000 likes from people, Americans or not. There are more than double that number of people that are ‘talking about’ the page by posting it on their own walls. A fan page (of sorts) dedicated to the President of the United States. But, not your normal fan page. It’s the ‘Obama is the Worst President Ever’ page.
By the time President Obama steps down from office, the USA will more than likely not be anything more than a shadow of its former self. That won’t be all due to the doing of President Obama, but the Chinese rise to glory as thefirst country in the world economically-speaking by the year 2016, amongst other things of course (it’s not all the fault of the Chinese either, is it?).
So is President Obama the worst President in history? Does he really live up to his fan (?) page on Facebook? How do you measure whether or not he is the worst, at any rate?


Obama: Worst US President?
Obama said in 2009 ‘the recession is over’, but few believed him. Anyhow, when he said that the US was doing ‘better’ at the time than ‘the worst of the recession’, that couldn’t have been hard, could it? By definition, recoveries are always better than the worst of the recessions that we have gone through in history. Isn’t that the way they always work? But, it’s not the recovery in comparison with the recession that should be compared, it’s the recovery and the boom-times after those historical recessions that need comparison to see just where we stand today and if the US has got back on track with President Obama’s policies.
Unemployment

• According to the records of the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, it took an average of just over two years (25 months, to be exact) to regain the level of employment prior to every one of the last ten recessions that the country has gone through.
• When the Great Recession officially began in December 2007, there was an unemployment rate of 4.9%.
• Some analysts say that the US won’t reach that sort of level until at least 2023.
• Obama will be long gone by then, somewhere probably with Ben Bernanke in a hide-out.
• The latest figures for unemployment stand at 7.4%, although admittedly if we look at real unemployment figures, then we are talking at least 14% since many of those that are classed as U6 (who are seeking full-time employment) are not counted in the figures if they are marginally employed (working for as little as just one hour a week perhaps).
• U3 people (but doesn’t include anyone who has not been looking for work for the previous four weeks) are the most used for figures to express US unemployment rates.
• It’s not about the numbers; it’s all about what you actually do with them that counts. It’s a bit like a game of poker. Get the cards and it’s what you do with them that’s going to make you come up a winner when the chips get thrown on the table. Obama has thrown his cards in already.
• It’s been 5 and a half years down the line now since the Great Recession began. It’s been over for over 3 years now that the Great Recession has officially been declared behind the US and part of history only to be remembered.
• We are still waiting to see a return to the job level of pre-2007. Time’s up, Mr. Obama.
• The six levels of unemployment are all published by the Bureau of Labor Statistics, but only one gets any coverage, and that’s not the real one.
• The US is still trying to make up for a shortfall of at least 2% on the pre-Great Recession unemployment figures. The US has 2.5 million fewer jobs today (but that’s not the real unemployment).
• The US has experienced the second longest period of unemployment above 8% ever between 1948 and 2013(the worst period being in 1981-1982).
• Unemployment may well fall to around 6% in 2015 as estimated, but that might well be only due to the fact that people who are discouraged fall out of the figures.

Growth

• In the past ten recessions before the Great Recession took place, Gross Domestic Product returned to levels seen prior to the recession within a period on average of 4-5 quarters.
• The Obama recovery took 16 quarters.
• GDP reached 1.1% in the first quarter of 2013 and then rose to 1.7% in the second quarter.
• It managed to reach just 2.8% in 2012.
• According to statisticians, if you were to take the real GDP growth under Obama and then double it (just for fun), Obama would still come out of it all as the worst president for the last 60 years.

Household Income

• Real median household income in the USA fell by $4, 500 under Obama’s first mandate, which is the average monthly salary.
• US middle-class households have lost a month’s salary, therefore; or about 8%.
• In comparison with 2009, real median household income has declined under Obama by 6% today.
• The decline in real median househould income during the official dates of the recession (2007 until 2009) only fell by 2.6%.
• Under Obama it has doubled.

Poverty

• Since 2009, the USA has seen the number of poor in the country increase by 31%.
• There are now nearly 50 million that are classed as ‘poor’ in the country.
• The Federal poverty threshold is an annual income of $23, 550 for four people in a family (subtracting or adding$4, 020 per person for additional or fewer people in the family).
• A single poor person has an annual income of $11, 490.
• The Census Bureau calculates in a different way, but the poverty threshold stands at $23, 283 (family of four).
• The levels of poverty and the number of people living in poor conditions have never been higher for the past 50 years.
  
  
  
  Is Obama the Worst President Really?

Yes, granted the Great Recession has been the worst possible recession experienced in history by its speed and by its knock-on effects, so the past might not be a useful tool to equate the new-style of slumps that we will possibly experience from now on. But, the Great Recession officially only lasted a short while. Maybe they were too quick at getting out the flags and the bunting to announce that it was over. At any rate, the Great Recession has had no Great Recovery. Not, yet, anyhow.
But why have all of these points been the failures of a man elected on a promise to rush in a new era in the US? Obama increased spending when he got into office and brought it to record levels.

• The deficit was already nearly at $1 trillion when he arrived, to which he added the $830 billion stimulus program, plus the $1.7-trillion Obamacare, with the bailouts and the financial reforms to boot.
• The second reason why Obama has not managed to reduce unemployment is because the economy has not been relaunched. The tax proposal issued in April this year would increase taxation for 98% of those on incomes over $200, 000 a year in the USA. Increasing taxation will not bring about a revamping of the economy.
• Regulations have also increased under Obama and made doing business more difficult. The Code of Federal Regulations increased under Obama by more than 11 thousand pages. That means that businesses have to spend more money on complying with the regulations, at a time when they just don’t have it. Annual compliance has been estimated at roughly $1.7 trillion per year (all federal regulations).