Why Aren't More Republicans PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS ? ?

[TimeToRelax]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

[page017]

Interesting question. I'm afraid I don't know the true answer. But lets look at some of the stereotypes here, to see if we can't find something. And I'm just throwing stuff out here, so don't get too worked up about it.

#1- Republicans are self starters, they don't like government interference. Well, education is a huge beuracracy. You get lots of people telling you how to do your job on a daily basis.

#2- Republicans are more businesslike, democrats are more emotional- There are certainly a lot of teachers who are pretty cold, and run their classroom according to certain rules. But most teachers do have more sensativity, and a nurturing side, especially at the lower grade levels.

#3 - Republican's like money. Some people say teachers make too much, others too little. Teachers do on average make more than the average American worker, but they make less than other professions that require a masters degree. So if you are looking to get a higher degree for the purpose of making money, there are other professions where you will make more based on the time you put into it.

#4- Teaching is a profession run by liberals. If you are a republican in college, surrounded by liberal professors, liberal students, the last thing you are going to want to do after 4 years is go into a profession that has the reputation of being liberal. You're not going to want to spend any more time hanging out with liberals. Republicans, even teachers, generally don't like teachers unions, or at least their politics. So since the perception is that teachers associations are all a bunch of liberals, they stay away. Then they try and change education from the outside, rather than the inside.

BTW, I am a republican HS teacher. I am a science teacher, but our HS history department is 3/4ths conservative as well. There were times I thought about quitting, and doing something else, but once you see the state of American Education, and some of the kids, you realize that the best way to help is from the inside. Every day, I'm in a battle with these kids who are right on the borderline of really making something of themselves, or ending up failures who are going to rely on the system and not really contribute anything back to society. Once you've been a part of that, and had some success getting kids on the right path, it's really hard to walk away and go sell insurance for a living or something like that. Since you know the battles going to go on either way, you just aren't going to be a part of it.

[Revolutionation]

what makes you think they aren't? 45% of the people in this country voted republican, i am sure some of them are teachers.

though, typically teachers in unions will vote democratic. maybe thats your answer.

[Revolutionation]

Interesting question. I'm afraid I
#4- Teaching is a profession run by liberals. If you are a republican in college, surrounded by liberal professors, liberal students, the last thing you are going to want to do after 4 years is go into a profession that has the reputation of being liberal. You're not going to want to spend any more time hanging out with liberals. Republicans, even teachers, generally don't like teachers unions, or at least their politics. So since the perception is that teachers associations are all a bunch of liberals, they stay away. Then they try and change education from the outside, rather than the inside.


since when did it become impossible to work with people who don't share the same political views as you? seriously, you are implying that a republican going to college to be a teacher won't want to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be forced to hang out with liberals?

[page017]

since when did it become impossible to work with people who don't share the same political views as you? seriously, you are implying that a republican going to college to be a teacher won't want to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be forced to hang out with liberals?

It's not impossible, but if you are picking a profession for yourself for the rest of your life, you want to pick the best one, one with the fewest negatives. And I think that for some people, after being a part of the liberal establishment during college, the idea of spending the rest of their careers with liberals might not be the most appealing. And I'm just making guesses here. I'm a republican who did go into teaching, so I'm not an expert on why republicans don't. We're all just throwing out ideas here, whats yours?

[Revolutionation]

It's not impossible, but if you are picking a profession for yourself for the rest of your life, you want to pick the best one, one with the fewest negatives. And I think that for some people, after being a part of the liberal establishment during college, the idea of spending the rest of their careers with liberals might not be the most appealing. And I'm just making guesses here. I'm a republican who did go into teaching, so I'm not an expert on why republicans don't. We're all just throwing out ideas here, whats yours?

my thought was teacher's unions. if you are a teacher, in a district with a union, you know you are voting democratic. though, i think there is something to be said for the polling from past elections that voters with a college degree tend to vote democratic (i think somewhere around 2:1). Teachers fall in that category certainly.

and i am not so sure college campuses are these crazy liberal establishments. for the most part, kids in college dont even talk about politics. seriously. unless you go to berkley or you are a political major.

[Static66]

My wife is a teacher in a middle school and my daughter is going to college to be a teacher as well, and we are all republicans. My wife and I actually had this conversation during the election and she said that conservative teachers in her school are there, just very quiet. She said it's almost like they had to have a secret handshake to know because the liberals in her school are so obnoxious about it. She'd just rather not engage them while she's at work.

[TCUFan]

I'm a Republican and teach science in a Texas public high school. I can tell you why there are so allegedly so few of us.

First of all, there's not that few of us, at least not here in Texas. But, the biggest reason you see so few conservatives in education nationwide is that there are too many more lucrative things conservatives tend to do with a degree. That's the biggest reason, and it's also the reason I'm leaving the profession. Why stay in a job that cuts off your pay raises at 15 years of service?

Also, university education departments indoctrinate their students into liberalism long before they ever even see a classroom. Most of the conservative teachers I know came out of alternative education programs, like myself, after we lost those aforementioned lucrative jobs for whatever reason and we're looking for some way, any way, to pay the bills, including stooping to teaching. Most of those people go back to their previous career as soon as a position opens back up. Me included. After six years of teaching, I'm going back to the IT field.

There's also the social aspect. Teachers are generally discouraged from openly talking about their faith. It's not that it's illegal to mention God in a school, it's just that there's always some socially inept little turd whose parents file a lawsuit because their future file title said they were traumatized by a cross on a chain around the lit teacher's neck. It's simply lawsuit avoidance.

Most teachers I know blithely ignore that, but then I've mostly taught in rural Texas, perhaps it's different in Dallas or somewhere, but I doubt it. I taught for a year in an inner city school. We professed a belief in a higher power on a daily basis, mostly to reassure ourselves admist a sea of human detritus these poor kids lives' were. They didn't ask for their parents to be idiots, and you could see the slow-mo train wreck coming a mile away, but no one could do anything about it. So, don't think all public school employees in urban areas are all raving atheists. Some of the most publicly faithful coworkers I had there were African-American women who kept telling me, "God bless you." for my decision to enter the teaching field.

Now, as a science teacher, I'm particularly hamstrung. Texas' TEA has a strict policy of neutrality regarding teaching the origin of life. Fortunately or unfortunately (whatever your patois) that's changing. People are recognizing the frailties of evolutionary biology and sensibilites are getting altered regarding teaching a theory as fact.

Now, I'm wierd. I don't think God should enter a discussion in a science classroom, not because I don't love Him or don't honor Him. He's a matter of faith, probably no less so than the atheist's Big Bang Theory, but still, a matter of faith. He cannot be scientifically proven, which is the point of having faith in Him. We should allow a Bible Studies elective for things like that. Public schools in Ukraine issue their students from junior high onward a Bible for their use in a classroom. Try doing that here...hopefully someday we will.

Anyhow, I love God and I love science and it's God that made me love science. If anything, my faith in higher power has made me more curious about the natural world around me, not less. Told you I was wierd.

I get around the whole 'no God in public schools' thing another way, too. I'm the athletic department's team chaplain for the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, which not even the ACLU seems to want to kick out of public schools, at least not in Texas, anyhow.

TCUFan

[RickRhetoric]

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

One reason is that many (if not all) public schools will not hire conservatives (discrimination) if the public school-hiring network finds out the applicant is a conservative or a Republican.

And trust me -- they do in fact research an applicant's politics.

The unwritten law is that one must be a member of the Democratic family in order to teach in public schools.

Happy winter solstice season.

[Revolutionation]

One reason is that many (if not all) public schools will not hire conservatives (discrimination) if the public school-hiring network finds out the applicant is a conservative or a Republican.

And trust me -- they do in fact research an applicant's politics.

The unwritten law is that one must be a member of the Democratic family in order to teach in public schools.

Happy winter solstice season.

please give one piece of proof that this happens. seriously.

[TCUFan]

One reason is that many (if not all) public schools will not hire conservatives (discrimination) if the public school-hiring network finds out the applicant is a conservative or a Republican.

And trust me -- they do in fact research an applicant's politics.

The unwritten law is that one must be a member of the Democratic family in order to teach in public schools.

Happy winter solstice season.

This greatly depends on where you are. In San Francisco public schools, I'd not be the least bit surprised.

I know a drama teacher who's being encouraged to leave his position for choosing a production that...let me see if I remember the words from the email he rather naively showed me...'violated the community's sensibilities and social mores'.

Yeah, I think that's about it.

TCUFan

[PhantomPholly]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

Because the only way to tap into the dollars spent on education is to join a Union and be a part of a government monopoly - two guarantees that any self-respecting Conservative would feel too awful about the work to participate in it.

[theant]

Because conservatives in accountability and responsibility for actions and consequences, good or bad, as well.

The libs have things upside down. Kids are rewarded for second place, given things unearned, not punished for greater transgressions than good kids for trivial things. Teachers fear the students because libs do not allow any kind of negative response to bad behavior.

A good kid often gets punished for minor things while a bad one gets nothing for relatively extreme behavior.

The libs have control of the schools so conservatives have gone toward Christian or home schooling even though it costs them twice.

[Tweetie]

since when did it become impossible to work with people who don't share the same political views as you? seriously, you are implying that a republican going to college to be a teacher won't want to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be forced to hang out with liberals?


It can be if your the only one of your kind. I grew up in a very liberal area. Everybody I knew was a liberal, most of my teachers if not all were liberals, relatives, their relatives, my coworkers, the people I served... All liberals. I was one in a million or so it felt. After a while it got tiresome being around everyone who thought the same and then criticized me for not being like them. I also got tired of them sticking their noses up at me for not being of their politics. I needed to be around some Conservatives as well and my family just was not going to solve that problem.

I did not really meet any Conservatives till I came here. It was on Hannity that I met my husband, whom I moved to Texas to be with. Before I moved here, I had joined that Hannity Meetup and did go to some meetings with other Hannity fans who were Conserveatives, but I was more interested in my Hubby by that time..LOL. Now I'm here, and although there are still Liberals, there is an equal share of of Conserveatives as well.

[angelicmadrigal]

Soooo from some of these posts I'm gathering some people think it's okay for conservatives to interject their political view into the classroom but not liberals? In my opinion your personal political views need to be left at the door, but well all know that requires a level of professionalism most people can't handle.

For instance I had a 4 year old that told me her grandmother told her that Barak Obama ate babies so no one should vote for him. (the granddaughter is 4 btw). I just ignored it as the rantings of an adult who didn't have enough sense to know that telling a child such things is a load of BS and not something a 4 year old needed to be concerned about. I didn't hear any ridiculous assertions about McCain from any kids. I saw a 4 year old wearing a McCain button around, but that didn't bother me...other than I think children that age should be left out of political promoting, but meh, it wasn't like that mother was telling a child ridiculous things. My opinion on it is I don't discuss politics, religion, or sex in my class. They are 2-6 year olds and in my opinion that's their parents problem not mine.

Personally I'd like to see more independants and moderates, because frankly the liberals and conservatives argue WAY WAY too much and nothing ever gets done or solved.

[angelicmadrigal]

yup.and them libs want to pump them kids full of zoloaf for depression:lol: you dont hear of kids shooting up christian schools

It's Zoloft btw, and it's use is not recommended for children and teens.

[angelicmadrigal]

Because the only way to tap into the dollars spent on education is to join a Union and be a part of a government monopoly - two guarantees that any self-respecting Conservative would feel too awful about the work to participate in it.

So no real conservative belongs to a union? Hrmm...I know quite a few Bush voters and conservative voters that work at GD that would disagree.

[pubschteacher]

http://www.hoover.org/publications/ednext/10823521.html

"Though better educated Americans tend to be more liberal, teachers appear to be somewhat of an exception. On homosexuality and abortion, teachers tend to be more liberal than less-educated Americans but more conservative than those with high levels of education."

Hmm...

[theant]

It's Zoloft btw, and it's use is not recommended for children and teens.

Regardless of the recommendations, many SSRIs including Zoloft are commonly prescribed for children. ..It seems a recent change that the root word for children is "chill". I have medicated kids but teachers did NOT have a say in it at all. We did exhaustive tests including serum levels of various chemicals involved as intermediaries to brain chemicals, foods, allergies, and many others. I would venture to say that less than 3% of parents do anywhere near the book reading, studying and investigation that we did. Lives and bodies are simply too precious to do anything less, imo. There are proper applications for these but I believe they are way overprescribed and way under-monitored. Lazy parents, teachers, administrators, and even doctors have contributed to this. It is up to us, the parents to educate ourselves and see that we don't have programmed, zombie kids who don't know how to deal with reality other than medications.

[angelicmadrigal]

We did exhaustive tests including serum levels of various chemicals involved as intermediaries to brain chemicals, foods, allergies, and many others.

Which is a case that is proably an exception of the rule. In general there are other avenues to explore before putting a child on medications that are not meant for use in children.

[Gregor]

yup.and them libs want to pump them kids full of zoloaf for depression:lol: you dont hear of kids shooting up christian schools

You don't often hear about it in public schools either, which is why it's still news. If it was the norm, you wouldn't hear about it at all.:rolleyes:

[Wart]

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .


I'm sure this has been posted in this thread before,

Because teachers are educated.

And it takes a special kind of stubborn to go through all that secondary education and remain Republican.

[PhantomPholly]

Soooo from some of these posts I'm gathering some people think it's okay for conservatives to interject their political view into the classroom but not liberals?

What an interesting way to describe the Liberal propensity to teach that there are no important values and the Conservative propensity to suggest that values are critical to a healthy, functioning society.

You, like most Liberals, do not seem to grasp that you cannot uphold the virtue of the rights of a single person if it is done at the expense of another - and thus Liberalism is, and must be, at it's core an unethical philosophy.

[angelicmadrigal]

You, like most Liberals, do not seem to grasp that you cannot uphold the virtue of the rights of a single person if it is done at the expense of another - and thus Liberalism is, and must be, at it's core an unethical philosophy.

I'm actually a moderate, thanks. I'm pointing out the innate hypocrisy in both lines of thinking. If Liberals should not be allowed to interject their biases into education, then it most certianly should not be acceptable for conservatives to do it. You do not get to paly by a different set of rules simply because of your political opinions/affiliations. Conservativse have no more bussiness forcing thier values on anyone than Liberals do, ragardless of how much you want to insist otherwise.

Actually if you want to talk about ethics, liberalism and conservatism are BOTH unethical, because they FORCE you to attempt to FORCE others into YOUR way of thinking, and attempt to squash dissent and individual opinion or any diviation from the mainstream line of thinking. That's the problem with BOTH ideologies, followers of both leave NO room for consensus or to attempt to come to ANY understandings of ANY mutual benefit. They are simply worried about thier OWN agendas, not the betterment of society. Frankly, claming otherwise is an illusion and deceptive, and reeks of denial.

[angelicmadrigal]

What an interesting way to describe the Liberal propensity to teach that there are no important values and the Conservative propensity to suggest that values are critical to a healthy, functioning society.
.

And simply because liberals teach values different from your own does NOT in any way mean they teach no values. They just are not the values you espouse.

[PhantomPholly]

I'm actually a moderate, thanks. I'm pointing out the innate hypocrisy in both lines of thinking. If Liberals should not be allowed to interject their biases into education, then it most certianly should not be acceptable for conservatives to do it.

Ok, fair enough so far. I'm also independent, because Conservatives no longer seem to believe in any principles, either - unless it is dogmatic teaching of the bible, which does not provide the kind of high-level understanding of basic principles necessary to understand how to promote peace with a multi-religious population.

You do not get to paly by a different set of rules simply because of your political opinions/affiliations. Conservativse have no more bussiness forcing thier values on anyone than Liberals do, ragardless of how much you want to insist otherwise.

That depends on who makes the rules!

:D

Actually if you want to talk about ethics, liberalism and conservatism are BOTH unethical, because they FORCE you to attempt to FORCE others into YOUR way of thinking, and attempt to squash dissent and individual opinion or any diviation from the mainstream line of thinking. That's the problem with BOTH ideologies, followers of both leave NO room for consensus or to attempt to come to ANY understandings of ANY mutual benefit. They are simply worried about thier OWN agendas, not the betterment of society. Frankly, claming otherwise is an illusion and deceptive, and reeks of denial.

Hmmm, apparently I'll have to agree with you on this. There are different flavors of Conservatism, and it gets more confusing when one discusses the political parties as neither truly adheres to Liberalism nor Conservatism. The definition of Conservatism I can identify is the one that guarantees individual freedom, and tells people that if they don't like what their neighbors are doing but it is legal then their only recourse is to either continue being miserable gets or learn to appreciate the fact that others have their own opinions. This would be the definitions put forth by our founding fathers, and this attitude of acceptance used to be the positive side of the Democratic party.

Lately, the Democratic party has firmly embraced Marxism, which means that they can no longer be tolerant of individuals who believe in personal responsibility. The Repugnatans have likewise embraced Marxism with staggering bailouts and forays into state ownership of private business.

[Long Island Bob]

And simply because liberals teach values different from your own does NOT in any way mean they teach no values. They just are not the values you espouse.

dangerous train of thought.
Your previous post was better.

[angelicmadrigal]

dangerous train of thought.
Your previous post was better.

They both mean the same thing.

Frankly, I'm just tired of either group acting like they have any moral authority in the matter at all. It's part of the reason I took a break in August, because I just got tired and sick of the constant snipping at each other that both groups were doing on this board. Seriously, you can't point out anything to either group about a valid point the other group may have ...or a valid point made by a third party...because OMG!! no one wants to hear that.

[Gregor]

I have been teaching in the same school district for 22 years. With VERY few exceptions (for instance I know the health teacher is a staunch republican), I have no idea what anyone's politics are. If anything where we all live is quite conservative and the district is republican, so I would venture to guess that there are more teachers on the right than the left--although moderate regardless.

These sweeping generalizations are always suspect. I knew one teacher, years ago, who was way to the left, but at the same time we had a teacher so far to the right that he included questions on his history exam such as: Who was the greatest president who ever lived? And the "right" answer was Reagan, even though Washington, Jefferson, and Lincoln were listed.

During the Bush/Kerry election, I was teaching a tenth grade class and the students asked me who I was voting for. I said it wasn't important, and what was more important were their beliefs. They got quiet, and I heard two kids mumbling. One said, "I know she's voting for Kerry." The other said, "Are you nuts? She's voting for Bush." I was content. I want my students to believe no matter which side they're on, I'm on their side, and that way the room will always be comfortable for them, and I can get on with the business of teaching.

[page017]

Just to get back on track here, because I'm not sure we've really answered the question at all yet. I guess the question should be passed on to the board members who are republicans, who are not teachers. My question for them would be, did you ever consider teaching? Why did you decide not to be a teacher? If you were told you had to become a teacher, what parts of becomming a teacher or the job itself would you like the least?

[budjaz]

page 017, I don't know how you do it.. but glad you do =)

[page017]

And actually, I was thinking that to really be accurate, any liberals who are on the board and not teachers should also share their reasons why. That way we can see if they are generally the same, or different.

[Celtic Pax]

I have taught HS social studies for 27 years. Started in public school for 2 1/2 years and then went into private school for troubled kids and been there ever since. Decided to go private as I found the public school approach to educating troubled teens to be a crock and generally ineffective. Combine that with the endless rules, regulations, reports, meetings, duties etc. and no way I would teach in a public school. Unfortunately, private schools or programs for troubled teens may become a thing of the past as over zealous politicians over regulate them to extinction. 26+ private programs for troubled teen closed their doors this year as more and more states place restrictions on where their students may go and various mandates they now require of private schools and programs. Add in the price and many schools districts are keeping kids local in ineffective programs because they are cheaper. Not very effective but cheaper. Too bad someone didn't do a story on the disappearing private schools and special programs for troubled teens nationally. I guess no one really cares as long as the troubled kids just disappear or go away.

[khigh]

Just to get back on track here, because I'm not sure we've really answered the question at all yet. I guess the question should be passed on to the board members who are republicans, who are not teachers. My question for them would be, did you ever consider teaching? Why did you decide not to be a teacher? If you were told you had to become a teacher, what parts of becomming a teacher or the job itself would you like the least?

I never considered teaching. I decided not to teach because I get frustrated easily if people don't pick up what I am saying quickly. Also could be because I want to get into either military tactics and strategy or be a medical examiner/forensic scientist.

If I had to be a teacher, I would hate it. I don't like teaching others, again, if they don't pick anything up fast. It's not politics for me, but because of my perfectionism. Now, I will home school my daughter, but it already looks like she will excel. At 1 1/2 years old, she knows her letters, numbers 1-10, most colors, and about 20 different animal names. She is fun to teach.

[Gregor]

Just to get back on track here, because I'm not sure we've really answered the question at all yet. I guess the question should be passed on to the board members who are republicans, who are not teachers. My question for them would be, did you ever consider teaching? Why did you decide not to be a teacher? If you were told you had to become a teacher, what parts of becomming a teacher or the job itself would you like the least?

Again, I'm not sure how you know the political leanings of teachers. I have worked with many of the same people for over two decades and with rare exception I couldn't tell you.

[Safiel]

I never considered teaching. I decided not to teach because I get frustrated easily if people don't pick up what I am saying quickly. Also could be because I want to get into either military tactics and strategy or be a medical examiner/forensic scientist.

If I had to be a teacher, I would hate it. I don't like teaching others, again, if they don't pick anything up fast. It's not politics for me, but because of my perfectionism. Now, I will home school my daughter, but it already looks like she will excel. At 1 1/2 years old, she knows her letters, numbers 1-10, most colors, and about 20 different animal names. She is fun to teach.

About the same here. I could never teach in a public or private school setting. I wouldn't mind doing seminars and such at the upper level college or post graduate setting though.

I did homeschool my kids, but I used a traditional self teaching method, not direct classroom instruction.

I would not have the patience to go 10 times over the same thing. :)

[samurai7]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

Because to be a public school teacher you have to be a member of the Teacher's Union, and the Teacher's Union is LIBERAL.

Republicans want to EDUCATE children, not INDOCTRINATE THEM. The teacher's union is not about educating children. Like all unions it's meant to protect it's members, whether they are doing a good job or not.

That contradicts the mission of education. Further, since the Teacher's Union is liberal and, like all unions, supports democrats because they protect unions to the detriment of everything else, education would contradict the interests of the Democrats.

Democrats don't want educated people. Educated people would know tax cuts aren't "just for the rich." They would know why class envy is not in their best interest. They would know why the bailouts cannot possibly work. They would know how this current crisis is NOT a failure of the free market, but a failure of government in INTERFERING with the free market. They would know Democrats, and their insistence on sub prime loans and using Fannie, Freddie, et al as a Democrat Piggy Bank (think Chris Dodd and Barney Frank) caused this crisis.

Educated people aren't stupid enough to fall for mindless Democrat rhetoric about class envy, thus Democrats and the Teacher's Union do NOT want a well educated populace.

That's why Republicans are for things like class vouchers, more private and religious education, THEY ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN JOB OF EDUCATING.

That's why Barack Obama is for making Head Start mandatory and all pre-school public. Can't start too early to have an indocrtinated populace too stupid and ignorant in real economics to see through the crap Democrats shovel.

Simple as that. :rolleyes:

[page017]

Again, I'm not sure how you know the political leanings of teachers. I have worked with many of the same people for over two decades and with rare exception I couldn't tell you.

Parking lot bumper stickers for one. Our school is also a bit smaller, with a fairly tight knit faculty. Politics is a common discussion around the lunch table.

[angelicmadrigal]

That's why Barack Obama is for making Head Start mandatory and all pre-school public.


It also has to do with a large group of parents not knowing what the content standards are for Kindergarten, or what kids need to know by Kindergarten now. It isn't the same as when _I_ was a kid, let me tell you that. I think that's part of the reason some people think it's a good idea.

Whether preschool should be mandatory or not depends on the work parents are willing (or able) to do at home. From what I've noticed from teaching preschool is some parents are laying the ground work and some are not. The ones that are not can run into problems of their kids either not being accepted into Kindergarten or being very behind if enrolled.

[samurai7]

It also has to do with a large group of parents not knowing what the content standards are for Kindergarten, or what kids need to know by Kindergarten now. It isn't the same as when _I_ was a kid, let me tell you that. I think that's part of the reason some people think it's a good idea.

Whether preschool should be mandatory or not depends on the work parents are willing (or able) to do at home. From what I've noticed from teaching preschool is some parents are laying the ground work and some are not. The ones that are not can run into problems of their kids either not being accepted into Kindergarten or being very behind if enrolled.

Oh baloney. Do you have kids in school?

I was having to teach my kid at home during that stupid "Goals 2000" because they weren't teaching her zip in school.

Between their idiotic creative spelling method and their DUMB AS HELL idea of teaching math (which you might as well call creative math), if I hadn't taught the kid at home, she wouldn't have learned a thing.

It is NOT like the standards are that high in public school anymore that they have to be all that "prepared" before school.

I don't care how conservatives (and I'm one of them), whine about Bush's education program. THANK GOD for Bush's "No Child Left Behind." It so raised education standards, it was a completely different experience for my youngest.

Be that as it may, adding another layer of the same failure the kids are getting in public school is not going to "prepare" them.

The answer is better education -- period.

[Gregor]

Parking lot bumper stickers for one. Our school is also a bit smaller, with a fairly tight knit faculty. Politics is a common discussion around the lunch table.

Oh. Well we don't have bumper stickers on our cars (can't say I've ever seen a political one), and, evidently, we have a lot more fun at lunch than you do. My husband's school sounds closer to yours, but the majority are republicans. I think where you live matters. Long Island has many republican strongholds and so the majority of teachers there are representative of the population.

[samurai7]

Parking lot bumper stickers for one. Our school is also a bit smaller, with a fairly tight knit faculty. Politics is a common discussion around the lunch table.

Teachers attacking your tires for another. I even caught one pony tailed one letting the air out of my tires because I had a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car.

:rolleyes:

[pubschteacher]

Because to be a public school teacher you have to be a member of the Teacher's Union, and the Teacher's Union is LIBERAL.

Generalization, depends on the state. I live in Colorado and membership in the association is voluntary.

Republicans want to EDUCATE children, not INDOCTRINATE THEM. The teacher's union is not about educating children. Like all unions it's meant to protect it's members, whether they are doing a good job or not.

Care to show me some proof that the teacher's unions are setting curriculum?
In Colorado, standards are set at the state level by standards and local curriculum is built by curriculum committees, consisting of teachers, parents and curriculum specialists, and then approved after three public readings by a locally elected school board.


Democrats don't want educated people. Educated people would know tax cuts aren't "just for the rich." They would know why class envy is not in their best interest. They would know why the bailouts cannot possibly work. They would know how this current crisis is NOT a failure of the free market, but a failure of government in INTERFERING with the free market. They would know Democrats, and their insistence on sub prime loans and using Fannie, Freddie, et al as a Democrat Piggy Bank (think Chris Dodd and Barney Frank) caused this crisis.

Again, care to provide some proof that Democrats don't want educated people. Real proof, not your little diatribe from above.


That's why Republicans are for things like class vouchers, more private and religious education, THEY ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN JOB OF EDUCATING.

Voucher initiatives have lost all 12 times they have been on the ballot. The last one, last year in Utah, lost in every single county in the state. Do you think there are any Republicans in Utah? Take a look... :-)


That's why Barack Obama is for making Head Start mandatory and all pre-school public. Can't start too early to have an indocrtinated populace too stupid and ignorant in real economics to see through the crap Democrats shovel.

Sounds like you should get on a curriculum committee the next time your local school districts Economics curriculum is under adoption. Get some like minded individuals and get on that committee, make the changes you think need to happen. Or sit on the sidelines and complain.. Your choice.

[joewoj]

There are several conservative teachers, me being one, but much of the administration is liberal, and don't have the guts to do' what's right", instead of what is "politically correct". We need more conservative leaders and the system will gradually return to quality of education over quantity of students graduating. School systems are simply lying to themselves and the public when they boast about the high percentage of graduating students.

[Gregor]

Teachers attacking your tires for another. I even caught one pony tailed one letting the air out of my tires because I had a Bush/Cheney sticker on my car.

:rolleyes:

I will never understand a teacher putting a bumper sticker on his/her car that will be parked at school. I've had this argument with my husband who insisted on putting his Obama sticker on his car.

My job is to create an environment for my students that is comfortable for ALL, regardless of their individual leanings, political or otherwise. I can't really do that if I've advertised my vote. Some will end up feeling disenfranchised and putting my students before my politics is key to my profession. I realize you have the right to do it. I realize it's free speech. I just don't get why you would want to alienate those who need to feel included in your classes.

BTW: I hope you called the police on the vandal and pressed charges.

[Gengar]

Why aren't more liberals employed?

[rightside]

If a person happens to be a Republican or Conservative, the left wing Liberal Teachers will not talk to the Conservative teacher , unless it's about business , Liberals are the people who segregate, they segregate themselves, and yes I will say this , they are the ones who are ruining Government Schools.

[samurai7]

Generalization, depends on the state. I live in Colorado and membership in the association is voluntary.


Association? It's a UNION! Unions are NOT voluntary! :))


Care to show me some proof that the teacher's unions are setting curriculum?

Yeah, Teachers have NO input on that whatsoever. :rolleyes: :))

You try that one. :))


In Colorado, standards are set at the state level by standards and local curriculum is built by curriculum committees, consisting of teachers, parents and curriculum specialists, and then approved after three public readings by a locally elected school board.

Oh that was a nice official answer. Now here is the reality. Teachers Unions fight against setting STANDARDS and having any ACCOUNTABILITY of their members.

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9A02E7D71339F937A35754C0A9669C8B 63

Now they can flower it up all the want. But being against setting standards like testing, is being against accountability. When there is no accountability, there are no real standards.

Now you can give me all the bullcrap you want, that this isn't true, and I will level you like a old shack with a sledgehammer by asking you ONE QUESTION.

If all I am saying isn't true, how come Obama is putting HIS KIDS IN A PRIVATE SCHOOL THAT IS NOT CONTROLLED BY THAT SAME TEACHER'S UNION??????????????

Why doesn't he want his kids to go into a public school IF education is as good as you say?

Otherwise, both Obama and YOU know, the education is CRAP and Democrats want it that way. Otherwise, they would be the first onboard to CHANGE IT.

But they don't change it, they fight for the very UNIONS that are screwing it up, and YET those same DEMOCRATS put their kids in private schools, WHERE THOSE SAME UNION TEACHERS DO NOT TEACH.

Now when you can spin your way around that, get back with me.

:)) :)) :)) :))

[Gregor]

Why aren't more liberals employed?

Actually welfare and unemployment are highest in red states. Do the search yourself.

[rightside]

Actually welfare and unemployment are highest in red states. Do the search yourself.



Are Michigan, California, and Rhode island , New York, Red States ?

[notluzn]

I've met a lot of republican teachers and a lot of them are young in thier 20's. They also love the military very much. Liberal teachers seem more bitchy and have less respect from their students because they tend not to have control over them. How Ironic huh?

[Gregor]

I've met a lot of republican teachers and a lot of them are young in thier 20's. They also love the military very much. Liberal teachers seem more bitchy and have less respect from their students because they tend not to have control over them. How Ironic huh?

Well if that's your experience, then certainly it must be true of all teachers. :rolleyes:

Where do you teach?

[Gregor]

Are Michigan, California, and Rhode island , New York, Red States ?

Did you check the stats? Get back to me when you actually have.:rolleyes:

[Gengar]

Actually welfare and unemployment are highest in red states. Do the search yourself.

Red states... in the blue metropolises. lol

Oh... and crime rate too!

[Gengar]

Actually welfare and unemployment are highest in red states. Do the search yourself.

Wakka wakka wakka.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_unemployment_rate

Rhode Island, Michigan, and California are red states?

Sweet. I had no idea.

[lawandorder]

Because he is soon to be the President of the United States, who is not liked by a lot of conservatives on the far right. Ever think that someone may try to harm his children?

[lawandorder]

No, we don't want to "pump" kids full of Zoloft.........maybe their parents.

[lawandorder]

Could not disagree with you more on NCLB.........it's a disaster.

[lawandorder]

I've met a lot of republican teachers and a lot of them are young in thier 20's. They also love the military very much. Liberal teachers seem more bitchy and have less respect from their students because they tend not to have control over them. How Ironic huh?

Liberal teachers don't have control over students, but conservative teachers do? How can this be if they teach in the same school, under the same rules? Can you help me out with that one?

[lawandorder]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

Have all liberal teachers just walk out and quit. Have the conservative teachers take over, and a few of their conservative friends, (they don't need a degree, as I understand from these posts, conservative anything is smarter than educated liberal teachers),,,run the school system your way! Put your money where your mouth is and stop complaining! Oh, and you could invite Sarah Palin to be your leader as she has such an interesting experience with kids.

[Gregor]

Wakka wakka wakka.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_unemployment_rate

Rhode Island, Michigan, and California are red states?

Sweet. I had no idea.

Before you do a dance, you might want to check these numbers:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/cblaws/fed_reg/fr120400.htm

Unemployment means you have collected unemployment, which means you had a job but the job was cut. These are your welfare stats, and the states that are most reliant on government are the red states.

[samurai7]

Actually welfare and unemployment are highest in red states. Do the search yourself.

No, it's YOUR assertion, YOU prove it.

I love the liberals who make assertions and then expect you to do their research for them. :rolleyes:

:))

[samurai7]

Because he is soon to be the President of the United States, who is not liked by a lot of conservatives on the far right. Ever think that someone may try to harm his children?

WHAT???????????????????

:rolleyes:

[samurai7]

I'm still waiting for an answer from liberals.

IF the public schools under the TEACHER'S UNIONs are soooooooooooooooo great, and Democrats really want to educate our children, THEN WHY IS OBAMA ENROLLING HIS CHILDREN IN A PRIVATE SCHOOL AWAY FROM THE INFLUENCE OF THE TEACHER'S UNION????????????

Still waiting for an answer.

Could it be the question shoots down the rhetoric liberals have about public schools and the truth of the Teacher's Union, hmmmmmmmmmmm?

:))

Funny, if our Democrat leaders are sooooooooooooooooooooo for education in the public schools, how come when it comes to educating their own kids, they always put them in elite private schools, that are NOT taught by Teacher's Union teachers and you and I CAN'T afford?

So public school is okay for us plebes but their children need to be REALLY EDUCATED?

And then I'm wrong when I say Democrats do NOT want our children educated because if they were, they would see through Democrat rhetoric, like "tax cuts for the rich?"

Then why don't they do something about it, instead of paying lip service to the problem while they put their own kids in private schools.

Still waiting for an answer.

:))

[angelicmadrigal]

IF the public schools under the TEACHER'S UNIONs are soooooooooooooooo great, and Democrats really want to educate our children, THEN WHY IS OBAMA ENROLLING HIS CHILDREN IN A PRIVATE SCHOOL AWAY FROM THE INFLUENCE OF THE TEACHER'S UNION????????????


I would think partly because it's a status symbol. Private schools have always has sort of the reputation as having better quality than public schools (which in some cases is true, and in some cases false. One of our local public schools has way better curriculum etc... than the local private school does) and therefore have always been seen as places of excellence, and more often than not sending your kids to private school USED to be a sign that you were well to do.

You can't prove your assertion that the reason Obama sends his kids to private has anythign to do with him being against teachers unions...while I can not disprove the assertion, I think there are plenty more LOGICAL and non partisian reasons why he would choose private school.

[pubschteacher]

Association? It's a UNION! Unions are NOT voluntary! :))

Try to pay attention, it is a professional association and in Colorado and in dozens of states all over this country, membership is VOLUNTARY. Is it a union, yes, is it voluntary in Colorado and many other states, yep.




Yeah, Teachers have NO input on that whatsoever. :rolleyes: :))
You try that one. :))

Again, not paying attention to the details. Standards at the state level, approved by an elected state board of education, curriculum set by curriculum committees, made up of teachers, PARENTS, interested community members and curriculum specialists. Of course teachers have input, it would seem ridiculous not to have that stakeholder group represented in a decision about what they are going to teach. That curriculum is read at PUBLIC school board meetings, open to community input, and then approved by a locally elected school board. So much for "teachers setting the curriculum argument"


If all I am saying isn't true, how come Obama is putting HIS KIDS IN A PRIVATE SCHOOL THAT IS NOT CONTROLLED BY THAT SAME TEACHER'S UNION??????????????

Well, obviously security is going to be an issue, a small private school like Sidwell, etc. is going to be far less complicated than a DC public school.
Second, the Obama's, like all Americans, have decided to make the economic sacrifice to send their kids to a private school. They decided to pursue an education that would give them the economic power to make that choice. Good for them.
Third, there are 90,000 public schools in this country, some great, some horrible. DC public schools fall into the bad category.


Otherwise, both Obama and YOU know, the education is CRAP and Democrats want it that way. Otherwise, they would be the first onboard to CHANGE IT.

Well, Obama and I both know that public education in Washington DC leaves a lot to be desired. If you want to blame that on the unions, fine, but the societal problems that plague our nation's capital are just reflected in its public schools.

But they don't change it, they fight for the very UNIONS that are screwing it up, and YET those same DEMOCRATS put their kids in private schools, WHERE THOSE SAME UNION TEACHERS DO NOT TEACH.

You haven't proven a thing. You have shown no evidence that Unions control curriculum (just that teachers have input, whether those teachers are union members or not, you have no clue). If you take a look at any national poll on education, the VAST majority of Americans support THEIR local public schools. No spin, just a fact. Vouchers lose everytime, even in an openly Republican state like Utah last year (60 percent against, lost in EVERY single county in the state)
Please feel free to put your kid in a private school if you want to...

Public Schools Vs. Private Schools: New Study Says There Is No Difference
http://education-portal.com/articles/Public_Schools_vs._Private_Schools:_New_Study_Says _There_is_No_Difference.html

Consider yourself gotten back to. :-)

[Gregor]

I'm still waiting for an answer from liberals.

IF the public schools under the TEACHER'S UNIONs are soooooooooooooooo great, and Democrats really want to educate our children, THEN WHY IS OBAMA ENROLLING HIS CHILDREN IN A PRIVATE SCHOOL AWAY FROM THE INFLUENCE OF THE TEACHER'S UNION????????????

Still waiting for an answer.

Could it be the question shoots down the rhetoric liberals have about public schools and the truth of the Teacher's Union, hmmmmmmmmmmm?

:))

Funny, if our Democrat leaders are sooooooooooooooooooooo for education in the public schools, how come when it comes to educating their own kids, they always put them in elite private schools, that are NOT taught by Teacher's Union teachers and you and I CAN'T afford?

So public school is okay for us plebes but their children need to be REALLY EDUCATED?

And then I'm wrong when I say Democrats do NOT want our children educated because if they were, they would see through Democrat rhetoric, like "tax cuts for the rich?"

Then why don't they do something about it, instead of paying lip service to the problem while they put their own kids in private schools.

Still waiting for an answer.

:))You demonstrate the danger of relying on talking points instead of really thinking about issues. Let me ask you a series of questions and see if you can come up with your own original ideas.

1. What is unique about DC?
2. How can the types of social problems that exist in DC be overcome?
3. How can the schools solve all those political and social problems alone?
4. Why is the crime so high in DC?
5. How can the schools compensate for the crime in DC?
6. Are the public schools in DC reprsentative of all public schools throughout the nation or are there particular problems associated with them due to DC's status?
7. If private schools were held to the same standards as public schools, i.e. they could not remove students who do not fit their mold, but rather have to educate ALL students, would the private schools be superior to the public ones?
8. How do we begin to solve DC's problems?

I'm asking you to put politics aside and discuss this using honest and original thinking. It may be too much to ask, but it's worth a shot.

[Gregor]

No, it's YOUR assertion, YOU prove it.

I love the liberals who make assertions and then expect you to do their research for them. :rolleyes:

:))

See post #61. I already did.:rolleyes: If I were like you I'd say the right can't read, but I'm not that low.

[Gregor]

Red states... in the blue metropolises. lol

Oh... and crime rate too!

Clearly you don't let facts get in the way of your opinions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_in_the_United_States

1. DC
2. Arizona
3. South Carolina
4. Washington
5. Louisiana
6. Hawaii
7. Texas
8. Tennessee
9. Oregon
10. Florida
11. New Mexico
12. Nevada
13. Oklahoma
14. Georgia
15. North Carolina
16. Arkansas
17. Alabama
18. Missouri
19. Kansas
20. Maryland

Now you do the math. Now I'll give you this, since more and more states are going blue, you will see an increase in all numbers, good and bad, as they pertain to the blue states. :naughty::naughty::naughty:

[Gengar]

Before you do a dance, you might want to check these numbers:
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/laws_policies/cblaws/fed_reg/fr120400.htm

Unemployment means you have collected unemployment, which means you had a job but the job was cut. These are your welfare stats, and the states that are most reliant on government are the red states.

Spin-a-roonie!

Now go look at the "Large Cities" section in your last link.

Tell us... how many of those cities are red? Hmmm? DC? LA? Chicago? Philly? Houston? Seattle? San Diego? Oh, I could go on.

Like I said... blue havens in red states... the crime for the whole state goes up up and away. Because of the big blue cities.

[Gregor]

Spin-a-roonie!

Now go look at the "Large Cities" section in your last link.

Tell us... how many of those cities are red? Hmmm? DC? LA? Chicago? Philly? Houston? Seattle? San Diego? Oh, I could go on.

Like I said... blue havens in red states... the crime for the whole state goes up up and away. Because of the big blue cities.

You were talking about the United States, not individual cities. Cities always have problems because they always have a larger underclass. You're the one spinning. The states on the list, for the most part, do not have cities the size of those in New York, Michigan, and California, so your theory doesn't really hold true. If anything, the one thing that's aparent from that list is those states have a dirth of large cities for the most part.:rolleyes:

Not sure how you can compare the cities in South Carolina, Louisiana, Tennessee, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Alabama, and Kansas to the ones in New York and Cali. which didn't make the top 20.


Please step away from the talking points and think for yourself.

[lawandorder]

not enough pay, maybe?

[rightside]

Did you check the stats? Get back to me when you actually have.:rolleyes:



You're going by States, check out Cities like Los Angeles, New York, Detroit, Boston, Miami, San Francisco , D.C. , Houston, Phoenix, and any left wing Liberal City their is.


Overcrowding has nothing to do with performance, Asians perform best in School because of family values , Hispanice perform worst because most Hispanics could care less about their kids, they only have them to collect a Welfare check .

I would rather be in a class with thirty five Asians than twenty Hispanics in America. It's not class size , it's Family values.

[hremom]

My aunt is a retired teacher, and a life-long Republican. My neighbor is also a teacher and a Republican.

As a matter of fact, from talking to most of the teachers in my local area I'd say most of them are conservative if not registered Republicans.

But then again, I live in small town Idaho.

[Gregor]

You're going by States, check out Cities like Los Angeles, New York, Detroit, Boston, Miami, San Francisco , D.C. , Houston, Phoenix, and any left wing Liberal City their is.


Overcrowding has nothing to do with performance, Asians perform best in School because of family values , Hispanice perform worst because most Hispanics could care less about their kids, they only have them to collect a Welfare check .

I would rather be in a class with thirty five Asians than twenty Hispanics in America. It's not class size , it's Family values.

Who said anything about overcrowding?

Again, PLEASE try to think for yourself and then get back to me.

The fact stands: The majority of welfare goes to red states, and your attempt to skew that fact demonstrates only that you won't let facts get in the way of your opinions. Ditto for crime. Higher in red states. :rolleyes: Your argument would make sense if NY or California were the number one states in terms of crime and welfare. They aren't. :rolleyes:

[Sidestreamer]

I laugh at this thread.

I went to high school in central Florida and all but three of my teachers there were either Republican or apolitical, with one of those three being a Naderite. My classmates were also overwhelmingly Republican, and I remember having an argument in my biology class after the 2000 election because I was literally the only Gore supporter there. Me vs. teacher and the whole class of 21, and yes, ALL of them were Bush supporters then.

Where do you come up with this idea that there are no conservatives in the classrooms? At least in the South, I have a very hard time finding liberals at the high-school level. I admit once I went to UF things changed a bit and I only ran across a handful of conservative professors and TAs, but high schools are loaded with cons and I think anyone outside of the northeast who says otherwise are probably the same people accusing George Bush of being some Dem-lite.

[samurai7]

I laugh at this thread.

I went to high school in central Florida and all but three of my teachers there were either Republican or apolitical, with one of those three being a Naderite. My classmates were also overwhelmingly Republican, and I remember having an argument in my biology class after the 2000 election because I was literally the only Gore supporter there. Me vs. teacher and the whole class of 21, and yes, ALL of them were Bush supporters then.

Where do you come up with this idea that there are no conservatives in the classrooms? At least in the South, I have a very hard time finding liberals at the high-school level. I admit once I went to UF things changed a bit and I only ran across a handful of conservative professors and TAs, but high schools are loaded with cons and I think anyone outside of the northeast who says otherwise are probably the same people accusing George Bush of being some Dem-lite.

No one is saying there isn't.

Having used to go to a "Southern" school in OK, I know what you mean.

Despite the USSC saying we couldn't have prayer or Jesus in class we did anyway, and I congratulate my teachers and school for doing so.

However that WAS 40 years ago, and times, I'm sure, have changed.

No one is saying there aren't Republican teachers teaching. We are answering the question, why aren't there MORE of them.

I know there are teachers like that even in Ohio.

When (under that crappy Goals 2000) my daughter's teacher praised my daughter's reading scores and ability, she lowered her voice to a whisper and said to me, "You've been teacher her phonics at home, haven't you?" (which I had. It was pretty obvious under the Clinton admin's Goal's 2000, it was the only way she was going to learn to read)

As IF teaching phonics is some kind of CONSPIRACY we don't dare say allowed. You want to know why Clinton kept talking about kids being able to read by fourth grade it was the stupid Goals 2000. Phonics was verboten under it, for that STUPID creative spelling. It was horrible AND COMPLETELY STUPID.

[samurai7]

I would think partly because it's a status symbol. Private schools have always has sort of the reputation as having better quality than public schools (which in some cases is true, and in some cases false. One of our local public schools has way better curriculum etc... than the local private school does) and therefore have always been seen as places of excellence, and more often than not sending your kids to private school USED to be a sign that you were well to do.

You can't prove your assertion that the reason Obama sends his kids to private has anythign to do with him being against teachers unions...while I can not disprove the assertion, I think there are plenty more LOGICAL and non partisian reasons why he would choose private school.

I never said he was against the teacher's unions. I'm sure he LOVES the teachers unions.

The teacher unions donate to Democrats. Of course he loves the teachers union.

I CAN, however, prove he doesn't want HIS KIDS educated by those teachers BY THE SCHOOL HE CHOSES FOR HIS OWN KIDS.

And don't give me status symbol. Show me the Democrat leaders that educates his kids in public schools. They ALL do the private thing.

It's hugely hypocritical, because the same Democrats who sent their kids to private school ARE AGAINST VOUCHERS OR ANY OTHER MEASURE SO YOU CAN DO THE SAME FOR YOUR KIDS.

No, they want YOU at the mercy of the teacher's union, AND IT'S OBVIOUS WHY.

The Democrats garner a lot of their power from the Teacher's Union, and if kids were getting a real education in economics (among other things) they would learn why the Democrat's class envy rhetoric is so empty.

DEMOCRATS DO NOT WANT THAT.

[Gregor]

I laugh at this thread.

I went to high school in central Florida and all but three of my teachers there were either Republican or apolitical, with one of those three being a Naderite. My classmates were also overwhelmingly Republican, and I remember having an argument in my biology class after the 2000 election because I was literally the only Gore supporter there. Me vs. teacher and the whole class of 21, and yes, ALL of them were Bush supporters then.

Where do you come up with this idea that there are no conservatives in the classrooms? At least in the South, I have a very hard time finding liberals at the high-school level. I admit once I went to UF things changed a bit and I only ran across a handful of conservative professors and TAs, but high schools are loaded with cons and I think anyone outside of the northeast who says otherwise are probably the same people accusing George Bush of being some Dem-lite.

Teachers generally reflect the population in which the schools are located. Of course there are republican teachers. Just more hoohah, fake outrage.:rolleyes:

[angelicmadrigal]

And don't give me status symbol. Show me the Democrat leaders that educates his kids in public schools. They ALL do the private thing.


It's your assertion, aren't you supposed to provide the truth. To prove your assertion you'd need the name of EVERY registered democrat and information about where they send their children to school. There you have a little project to keep you busy.

Whether you believe it or not historically private school was for the wealthy, hence the reputation as a status symbol.

Oh, and btw I will say whatever I damn well please. Get over it.

[angelicmadrigal]

I CAN, however, prove he doesn't want HIS KIDS educated by those teachers BY THE SCHOOL HE CHOSES FOR HIS OWN KIDS.


How exactly can you PROVE that. Are you Barak Obama? Do you know his intentions/reasons for sending his children to private school? If you claim you do, I call BS. His (or anyone)sending his (or their) children to private shcool is not an indicator that they beleive there is anything WRONG with public school. For instance in MY family, it is family tradition to go to catholic school, we don't have anything against public schools our family has just been using Catholic schools for several generations.

[Gregor]

It's your assertion, aren't you supposed to provide the truth. To prove your assertion you'd need the name of EVERY registered democrat and information about where they send their children to school. There you have a little project to keep you busy.

Whether you believe it or not historically private school was for the wealthy, hence the reputation as a status symbol.

Oh, and btw I will say whatever I damn well please. Get over it.
I don't get it. Anyone can send his/her children to private school. They're not illegal. The difference is the left still provides for those who want to attend public school. I could see the right screaming hypocrisy if the left said they wanted public schools funded by everyone except them, but that isn't the case. They're not whining.:rolleyes:

[rightside]

Who said anything about overcrowding?

Again, PLEASE try to think for yourself and then get back to me.

The fact stands: The majority of welfare goes to red states, and your attempt to skew that fact demonstrates only that you won't let facts get in the way of your opinions. Ditto for crime. Higher in red states. :rolleyes: Your argument would make sense if NY or California were the number one states in terms of crime and welfare. They aren't. :rolleyes:


I know Illinois is , home of Blago and Barrack.

[angelicmadrigal]

I don't get it. Anyone can send his/her children to private school.

The point I was trying to make is at first was that privates chool was ORIGINALLY for the wealthy, and that it still retains a little bit of that symbolism today.

[samurai7]

It's your assertion, aren't you supposed to provide the truth. To prove your assertion you'd need the name of EVERY registered democrat and information about where they send their children to school. There you have a little project to keep you busy.

Whether you believe it or not historically private school was for the wealthy, hence the reputation as a status symbol.

Oh, and btw I will say whatever I damn well please. Get over it.


:))

Oh PLEASE!

The last Democrat president to send his kids to public school was Jimmah Carter.

Show me the Democrat leaders in Washington that send their kids to public school.

I CAN'T EVEN NAME THE DEMOCRAT LEADERS IN OHIO THAT DO THAT! :))

From the Gov on down they all send their kids to private school while making edicts for our kids in the public school.

A nice try on your part, but liberals always did want to fight against the obvious.

:))

[samurai7]

The point I was trying to make is at first was that privates chool was ORIGINALLY for the wealthy, and that it still retains a little bit of that symbolism today.

Nice try, but private schools mean real education!

If Democrats really thought public school was all that and a bag of chips, they would put their own kids in there too.

:rolleyes:

[angelicmadrigal]

:))

Oh PLEASE!

The last Democrat president to send his kids to public school was Jimmah Carter.


Actually what you said is ALL democrats. Which means ALL, including democratic voters. I take it you've looked up EVERY democrat in government and asked them where they send their kids to school? Wow, you've only had .....hrmm less than 24 hours to do all that. You must be superman...Again, you haven't proven anything, you're just talking out of your ass.

Honestly, I don't realy care where anyone sends their kid. That's THEIR bussiness not mine. And agian just because someone sends thier kid to private school it doesn't mean they are saying "Public schools aren't good enough for MY kid". I'm sure some people think that way, but it doesn't necessarily mean everyone does. You assume to know more about people's intentions than you have any ability to know. You could be wrong, you could be right, but dont' act like you KNOW anything for certain when you don't.

[angelicmadrigal]

Nice try, but private schools mean real education!
Not exactly true. The private school I went to isn't NEAR as good curriculum wise as one of the local public schools which offers WAY more AP courses, advanced programs, and special interest activities. So Again, there you go talking out your ass.


If Democrats really thought public school was all that and a bag of chips, they would put their own kids in there too.


Public school isn't for every kid, especially if in your area the public schools are crap. Though in some areas your private schools aren't that much better. Again, prove to me that EVERY democrat sends their kid to private school.

[Safiel]

Best thing is to not make sweeping generalizations.

I have seen them made by BOTH sides in regards to education.

Considering that neither the Democrats nor Republicans education policies are particularly enlightened, neither should be criticizing the other.

[pubschteacher]

:))

Oh PLEASE!

The last Democrat president to send his kids to public school was Jimmah Carter.

In Arkansas, Chelsea Clinton attended Forest Park Elementary School, Booker Arts and Science Magnet Elementary School and Horace Mann Junior High School

Now, do you understand that if a President sends their child to a public school, they have, in essence, made them a public figure. Who is going to keep the media off the school ground, it is public property. A private school just makes sense and you know it, you just want to rant
BTW. there are a ton of questions unanswered by you on previous posts. Are you going to get around to that or just concede you were wrong?

Show me the Democrat leaders in Washington that send their kids to public school.

Again, the worked hard, achieved the economic status needed to send their kids to private school if they CHOSE to. Their choice. Your choice as well if you have worked hard enough to achieve that kind of economic status. If not, please don't expect the rest of us, through out tax dollars, to fund your choice. Now, if you can get a majority to vote for vouchers, you are good to go.. 0-12, not even close the last three times. Don't hold your breath and quit your whining.

[Gregor]

Nice try, but private schools mean real education!


:rolleyes:

Have stats to back that up?

[archangelo]

I don't get it. Anyone can send his/her children to private school. They're not illegal. The difference is the left still provides for those who want to attend public school. I could see the right screaming hypocrisy if the left said they wanted public schools funded by everyone except them, but that isn't the case. They're not whining.:rolleyes:
Like Welfare, it keeps the undesirables quiet, happy, and too fat and dumb to bother to get up and look for something better or (God forbid!) try to get into your neighborhood or school!

The Left is so generous like that...

[dru]

Like Welfare, it keeps the undesirables quiet, happy, and too fat and dumb to bother to get up and look for something better or (God forbid!) try to get into your neighborhood or school!

The Left is so generous like that...
What are you talking about? That makes no sense. They provide for public education because it's absolutely essential for a functioning democracy. To try to spin it as some kind of mechanism for discrimination is pretty nuts if you ask me.

[Gregor]

Like Welfare, it keeps the undesirables quiet, happy, and too fat and dumb to bother to get up and look for something better or (God forbid!) try to get into your neighborhood or school!

The Left is so generous like that...

Do you know anything bout the history of public education in this country. I'm thinking the answer is no.

[PoliTick]

huh?? yea you lost me...i suppose maybe college preofessors tend to be a little more liberal..but public schools? nahh..

[archangelo]

Do you know anything bout the history of public education in this country. I'm thinking the answer is no.

The American Public School System was founded on religious intolerance. It has gone downhill from there.

[archangelo]

What are you talking about? That makes no sense. They provide for public education because it's absolutely essential for a functioning democracy. To try to spin it as some kind of mechanism for discrimination is pretty nuts if you ask me.

It began in discrimination. That's not to say that many noble idealists have not worked, even sacrificed, to make it an "absolutely essential" part of "a functioning democracy," which it should be. They have simply failed to prevail against the corrupt and less noble-minded.

[Gregor]

The American Public School System was founded on religious intolerance. It has gone downhill from there.

Yep. As I thought.

[archangelo]

Yep. As I thought.

It's a wonderful thing to "exceed the standards" of the self-esteem curriculum, isn't it? Of course it is! It makes us a great nation. Well, at least comfortable.

[konssurvative1]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

They are...they just cannot admit it infront of their colleagues and teacher reps for the union... or they become second class citizens in thier schools...my wife, my mom and my dad have all been ridiculed for their republicanism. It is almost as if there is a mind set of "oh my god how could you be a teacher and a republican at the same time. Ever read the monthly NEA magizine? That'll tell you a lot.

[konssurvative1]

One reason is that many (if not all) public schools will not hire conservatives (discrimination) if the public school-hiring network finds out the applicant is a conservative or a Republican.

And trust me -- they do in fact research an applicant's politics.

The unwritten law is that one must be a member of the Democratic family in order to teach in public schools.

Happy winter solstice season.

That is such BS...Many if not all...that is a load of crap...my wife got hired as a conservative republican...my father was the cities republican chairperson as a teacher...I don't think many schools systems would turn down a good teacher based on their political beliefs...schools right not need more than idealogy...they need good tough teachers willing to teach not politicos who are there to push an agenda.

[ConstitutionHugger]

My Mom Is a conservative School teacher, My Wife is going to college to be a teacher and she is VERY Conservative (more so than me, which is one of the reasons why i love her :) ) And my mother inlaw is a teacher's aide and she is also very conservative.

But then again that could be because i live in a VERY VERY red state where even the Dems are Conservative

[lawandorder]

Because to be a public school teacher you have to be a member of the Teacher's Union, and the Teacher's Union is LIBERAL.

Republicans want to EDUCATE children, not INDOCTRINATE THEM. The teacher's union is not about educating children. Like all unions it's meant to protect it's members, whether they are doing a good job or not.

That contradicts the mission of education. Further, since the Teacher's Union is liberal and, like all unions, supports democrats because they protect unions to the detriment of everything else, education would contradict the interests of the Democrats.

Democrats don't want educated people. Educated people would know tax cuts aren't "just for the rich." They would know why class envy is not in their best interest. They would know why the bailouts cannot possibly work. They would know how this current crisis is NOT a failure of the free market, but a failure of government in INTERFERING with the free market. They would know Democrats, and their insistence on sub prime loans and using Fannie, Freddie, et al as a Democrat Piggy Bank (think Chris Dodd and Barney Frank) caused this crisis.

Educated people aren't stupid enough to fall for mindless Democrat rhetoric about class envy, thus Democrats and the Teacher's Union do NOT want a well educated populace.

That's why Republicans are for things like class vouchers, more private and religious education, THEY ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN JOB OF EDUCATING.

That's why Barack Obama is for making Head Start mandatory and all pre-school public. Can't start too early to have an indocrtinated populace too stupid and ignorant in real economics to see through the crap Democrats shovel.

Simple as that. :rolleyes:

George Bush signed into law the "no child left behind", the most disasterous piece of legislation ever. And I suppose you think he knew what he was doing ? One size does NOT fit all, my friend. This law has destroyed the education of many, and has brought down standards for the rest.

[lawandorder]

What an interesting way to describe the Liberal propensity to teach that there are no important values and the Conservative propensity to suggest that values are critical to a healthy, functioning society.

You, like most Liberals, do not seem to grasp that you cannot uphold the virtue of the rights of a single person if it is done at the expense of another - and thus Liberalism is, and must be, at it's core an unethical philosophy.

Christ taught socialist values.

[PhantomPholly]

Christ taught socialist values.

Christ said "render unto Caeser Caeser's due" and preached giving, but did not suggest that all ownership of property be transferred to the State.

It is amazing how many people believe Christ preached their personal political viewpoint...

:rolleyes:

[lawandorder]

Christ said "render unto Caeser Caeser's due" and preached giving, but did not suggest that all ownership of property be transferred to the State.

It is amazing how many people believe Christ preached their personal political viewpoint...

:rolleyes:

Christ was real big on taking care of the poor. He destroyed cities because they failed to care for the poor.

[PhantomPholly]

Christ was real big on taking care of the poor. He destroyed cities because they failed to care for the poor.

Sheriff Arapaho in Arizona has shown how you can feed, clothe, and house people for about $1 per day. Given that this is possible, it would be possible to feed half our population for only 12% of the current Federal budget. Obviously, feeding the poor isn't what is happening in Washington.

You don't need a hugely Socialistic system to feed the poor. That exists only because politicians want more power - something which Christ abhorred. Also notice that Christ kicked the money-lenders out of the temple. We enshrine them in the hallowed halls of Congress, and when their graft and corruption causes the inevitable failures we reward them by promoting them and giving them trillions to spend any way they want.

So, once again people are reading their own political agenda into Christ's words.

[lawandorder]

Christ said "render unto Caeser Caeser's due" and preached giving, but did not suggest that all ownership of property be transferred to the State.

It is amazing how many people believe Christ preached their personal political viewpoint...

:rolleyes:

Yes it is amazing. Conservatives taught me a lot.

[JohnnyC]

i am a teacher and a republican...in my school there are a handful of conserv republicans...i'd say there is 16% of the staff.


i need to move to a red state :)

[curtis123]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

Those who can't do....teach.

[Gregor]

Those who can't do....teach.

I was a writer for years (Newsday, The Village Voice, Maximum Guitar, Popular Photography, among other publications). I decided to get my teaching certification to supplement my income. The last day of classes I met my boss and realized I could write and teach. I've been doing it for 22 years. There goes your theory!:)):)):))

[Long Island Bob]

George Bush signed into law the "no child left behind", the most disasterous piece of legislation ever. And I suppose you think he knew what he was doing ? One size does NOT fit all, my friend. This law has destroyed the education of many, and has brought down standards for the rest.

horse hockey
to start with the bill was written by Ted Kennedy.

It requires states to come up with test for their students (any tests any standard no matter how low the standard still counts).

it then says that if too many students in a given school fail those tests the school must either
- end social promotion and actually fail those students
- give special help via small before or after school classes to those students
- allow those students to attend other schools
- continue on wiht the miserably low results and social promotion but give up title 1 funds (which constitute under 5% of the fundsin anygiven school)

There is nothing in that bill that destroys education, nothing.

[WreckedParty]

They both mean the same thing.

Frankly, I'm just tired of either group acting like they have any moral authority in the matter at all. It's part of the reason I took a break in August, because I just got tired and sick of the constant snipping at each other that both groups were doing on this board. Seriously, you can't point out anything to either group about a valid point the other group may have ...or a valid point made by a third party...because OMG!! no one wants to hear that.



I know exactly how you feel, but i dont think ive experienced any political indoctrination in my school, just my history teacher talking about wives poisoning their husbands >

[lawandorder]

Yes, there is and I live it everyday I teach.

[Dem]

horse hockey
to start with the bill was written by Ted Kennedy.

It requires states to come up with test for their students (any tests any standard no matter how low the standard still counts).

it then says that if too many students in a given school fail those tests the school must either
- end social promotion and actually fail those students
- give special help via small before or after school classes to those students
- allow those students to attend other schools
- continue on wiht the miserably low results and social promotion but give up title 1 funds (which constitute under 5% of the fundsin anygiven school)

There is nothing in that bill that destroys education, nothing.

I don't know. I've known many teachers, both Conservative and Liberal, who believe the NCLB Act was disastrous and as been bad for schools.

[Dem]

Now, as a science teacher, I'm particularly hamstrung. Texas' TEA has a strict policy of neutrality regarding teaching the origin of life. Fortunately or unfortunately (whatever your patois) that's changing. People are recognizing the frailties of evolutionary biology and sensibilites are getting altered regarding teaching a theory as fact.
You're a science teacher? Their are frailties in any theory, and as a science teacher, you should know that. As a science teacher you should that just because there are wholes in a theory, doesn't make the the theory wrong. The theory of evolution doesn't even explain the origins of life.


Now, I'm wierd. I don't think God should enter a discussion in a science classroom, not because I don't love Him or don't honor Him. He's a matter of faith, probably no less so than the atheist's Big Bang Theory, but still, a matter of faith. He cannot be scientifically proven, which is the point of having faith in Him. We should allow a Bible Studies elective for things like that. Public schools in Ukraine issue their students from junior high onward a Bible for their use in a classroom. Try doing that here...hopefully someday we will.
"atheist's Big Bang Theory"? How is the Big Bang Theory atheistic in anyway?

There are many theists that accept both the theory of evolution and the big bang theory. There is nothing wrong with these theories, and if you have evidence to the contrary, get published. You would most likely win a Nobel Prize for showing these theories to be wrong.

Quite frankly, I am concerned as to what you have been teaching our children.

[Mobulis]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not believe in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

They care more about making money and being a teacher doesn't pay that well.

[Frazzled]

They care more about making money and being a teacher doesn't pay that well.

..really? I'd say the pay is pretty good considering they only work 8-9 months a year .....:rolleyes:

[pubschteacher]

..really? I'd say the pay is pretty good considering they only work 8-9 months a year .....:rolleyes:

Colorado State University has a streamlined program that allows people from different fields get their teaching credentials. The attrition rate among teachers from that program is almost double that of teachers who took the traditional route. Would you care to guess, why so many of these teachers drop out in the first three years? Their number one reason is....they were astonished by the sheer amount of time and effort the job required. So, they quit, went back to their previous career. Why don't you give it a whirl for a year or two and see if you feel adequately compensated for the time you put in. :-)

[Mobulis]

..really? I'd say the pay is pretty good considering they only work 8-9 months a year .....:rolleyes:

Are you a teacher or know one?

[hap]

I'm sure that there are many republican school teachers, The problem is that they have to keep it a secret,because they are not welcome in our education system.

[pubschteacher]

I'm sure that there are many republican school teachers, The problem is that they have to keep it a secret,because they are not welcome in our education system.

Would you care to provide some proof to your assertion that conservatives are not welcome in K-12 public schools in this country. Anecdotal evidence is not going to cut it.
School districts in Colorado have a standardized set of questions for applicants, none of which have anything to do with a person's politics.

[jimjames418]

..really? I'd say the pay is pretty good considering they only work 8-9 months a year .....:rolleyes:
Teachers work on a contract basis. Usually between 185 and 198 days of work. It is considered a 10 month contract.

On a per day basis the pay is less than an auto worker makes, about $150 to $200 per day, plus any benefits they may be eligible to receive.

The problem is that teachers are covered by three things: 1) their personal contract; 2) the union contract; and 3) tenture laws of the state. It makes it almost impossible to fire an unproductive or unqualified teacher once they achieve tenture. The legal fees alone run into the hundreds of thousands and the time frame is from two to five years. Cheaper just to buy out their contract.

[jimjames418]

Would you care to provide some proof to your assertion that conservatives are not welcome in K-12 public schools in this country. Anecdotal evidence is not going to cut it.

School districts in Colorado have a standardized set of questions for applicants, none of which have anything to do with a person's politics.
Every new teacher hired must be approved by the selection committee of the district. The selection committee is compoised of current teachers, and they have their own set of questions and interview technicques.

That is not anecdotal, it is actual practice of what occurs in the hiring process. :D

[pubschteacher]

Every new teacher hired must be approved by the selection committee of the district. The selection committee is compoised of current teachers, and they have their own set of questions and interview technicques.

That is not anecdotal, it is actual practice of what occurs in the hiring process. :D

Interesting approach. Here in Colorado, you are interviewed by the administration, current teachers in your discipline and often a member of our parent community. There is a set of questions and that is what you get to ask. The only time that you get to deviate from those questions is at the end of the interview when the applicant is asked if they have any questions the committee can answer. Politics are not part of the equation, by design.

[Gregor]

Every new teacher hired must be approved by the selection committee of the district. The selection committee is compoised of current teachers, and they have their own set of questions and interview technicques.

That is not anecdotal, it is actual practice of what occurs in the hiring process. :D

In my district you are interviewed by the principal, assistant principal, department head, and usually one or two teachers. The finalists are then sent up to the Super and the Assistant Super who make the final selection. This varies somewhat. For instance, last time we had many jobs to fill and so the first round involved the department head and two teachers, but then moved on to the Principal, AP etc. When we hired the librarian, one teacher, the principal, the AP, and one of the other librarians served on the committee. When we hired the department head it was several teachers, principals from both the middle and high school, the head of guidance, and the assistant super. I've served on MANY interview committees and politics has never come up in any way, shape, or form. Nor did it when I was interviewed.

BTW: What you wrote is either anecdotal or inaccurate or both; interviewing varies from district to district. I have interviewed in a number of districts and they were quite different. In one district I was interviewed by the principal and in another by the department head. There was no one else present.

[Gregor]

Teachers work on a contract basis. Usually between 185 and 198 days of work. It is considered a 10 month contract.

On a per day basis the pay is less than an auto worker makes, about $150 to $200 per day, plus any benefits they may be eligible to receive.

The problem is that teachers are covered by three things: 1) their personal contract; 2) the union contract; and 3) tenture laws of the state. It makes it almost impossible to fire an unproductive or unqualified teacher once they achieve tenture. The legal fees alone run into the hundreds of thousands and the time frame is from two to five years. Cheaper just to buy out their contract.
I never heard of anyone's contract being bought out. You're fired or you're not. During the 3020A process you're usually moved to a clerical position until guilt can be assessed. In my district several teachers have had 3020A hearings and two were fired. Granted I have been teaching a long time, so that isn't many. Department heads and administration, though, have many ways they can "encourage" teachers to do a better job or retire. Also, btw, while tenure offers quite a bit of protection, we also can't strike.

[jimjames418]

I never heard of anyone's contract being bought out. You're fired or you're not. During the 3020A process you're usually moved to a clerical position until guilt can be assessed. In my district several teachers have had 3020A hearings and two were fired. Granted I have been teaching a long time, so that isn't many. Department heads and administration, though, have many ways they can "encourage" teachers to do a better job or retire.
It varies from state to state. Here in Michigan it is very hard and expensive to fire a teacher. Three years ago there was a male teacher, with 33 years experience, in a neighboring district who was charged and pled guilty to "inappropriate sexaul contact" with a 16 year old student. He was sentenced to jail and served his time, 90 days in the local jail. When he was released he expected to return to his job, which the district refused him. He sued the district under the tenture laws and an out of court settlement was made with him. He was awarded two years pay and allowed to retire with full benefits. That is what is called buying out a contract.

When as a business manager I enforced a zero based budgeting process one year, my contract was bought out with a three year salary payment. I was way past wanting to retire anyway. :D

Also, btw, while tenure offers quite a bit of protection, we also can't strike.
Strikes are illegal for public employees. But until several years ago when they put teeth (money pentalties) into the law Michigan averaged 4 to 8 teacher strikes per year. In PA there has been 82 teacher strikes in the last 7 years, highest in the nation.

Under the tenture law in Michigan a district must first go through the process of firing the teacher, going through the union grieveance, going through the court system and if the district wins in all those instances, then the district must face the tenture commission and win, and then another court case.

Is it any wonder that most administrators say "to hell with it, it isn't worth it"? Because at every step in the process it is not the teacher who is questioned, it is the district personnel who is accused of misconduct by the teacher and the union. :wall:

[Gregor]

It varies from state to state. Here in Michigan it is very hard and expensive to fire a teacher. Three years ago there was a male teacher, with 33 years experience, in a neighboring district who was charged and pled guilty to "inappropriate sexaul contact" with a 16 year old student. He was sentenced to jail and served his time, 90 days in the local jail. When he was released he expected to return to his job, which the district refused him. He sued the district under the tenture laws and an out of court settlement was made with him. He was awarded two years pay and allowed to retire with full benefits. That is what is called buying out a contract. NY doesn't do that. At least not that I've ever heard of. We had a health teacher years ago who had tenure who got into a he said/he said situation. There was NO allegation of touching of any kind, just an inappropriate comment: (you can serve detention or I can pull down your pants and spank you.) He ended up w/ a 3020A and was canned. Something similar happened in my husband's school recently and the same thing happened. I know people say it's impossible, but I've seen it done effectively more than once and both my husband and I work in small districts.

When as a business manager I enforced a zero based budgeting process one year, my contract was bought out with a three year salary payment. I was way past wanting to retire anyway. :D We get state incentives but individual districts don't make these calls.


Strikes are illegal for public employees. But until several years ago when they put teeth (money pentalties) into the law Michigan averaged 4 to 8 teacher strikes per year. In PA there has been 82 teacher strikes in the last 7 years, highest in the nation.

Under the tenture law in Michigan a district must first go through the process of firing the teacher, going through the union grieveance, going through the court system and if the district wins in all those instances, then the district must face the tenture commission and win, and then another court case.

Is it any wonder that most administrators say "to hell with it, it isn't worth it"? Because at every step in the process it is not the teacher who is questioned, it is the district personnel who is accused of misconduct by the teacher and the union. :wall:Never heard of a NY district striking. Not saying it never happened, but it sure must be very rare. We've worked a few years without a contract and striking never came up.

[lawandorder]

Teachers earn every penny they make. We feed the kids, teach the kids, counsel the kids, dress the kids, and, discipline the kids. And, many teachers teach summer school.

[jimjames418]

NY doesn't do that. At least not that I've ever heard of. We had a health teacher years ago who had tenure who got into a he said/he said situation. There was NO allegation of touching of any kind, just an inappropriate comment: (you can serve detention or I can pull down your pants and spank you.) He ended up w/ a 3020A and was canned. Something similar happened in my husband's school recently and the same thing happened. I know people say it's impossible, but I've seen it done effectively more than once and both my husband and I work in small districts.
We get state incentives but individual districts don't make these calls.Never heard of a NY district striking. Not saying it never happened, but it sure must be very rare. We've worked a few years without a contract and striking never came up.
New York teachers strike in 1968 was a national story that ran for weeks in all the papers and on tv.

There was a report of a teacher strike while the Pope was visiting recently. Not sure because I usually don't follow New York news all that closely. ;)

[cowboy]

I've been a public school teacher for 18 years and I'm republican.

[John Smith]

I'm a teacher, my wife is a teacher, my sister, mother, and all her friends are teachers in public schools. We are all conservative republicans, and we see it as our duty to tell our liberal co-workers to stop whining about NCLB. It's about time they started doing their job anyway!

[rabbieric]

Without going into too much detail I happen to know quite a bit about the subject, public education is inundated with leftist doctrine in a way that no other disclipine besides Academia and the Media could possibly be. I encourage anybody to take out some of the text books required for teacher certification. Also, look at what the students are learning. I found out that in the public schools in New York when they were teaching the primaries they only mentioned the Democratic candidates. Students weren't even aware that the winner of the Democratic primary still had to run against somebody else. I could rattle of many examples but I will opt not to for now.

[WreckedParty]

meh if they want to be in education then theyll go for it, whats the big deal?

[pubschteacher]

Without going into too much detail I happen to know quite a bit about the subject, public education is inundated with leftist doctrine in a way that no other disclipine besides Academia and the Media could possibly be. I encourage anybody to take out some of the text books required for teacher certification. Also, look at what the students are learning. I found out that in the public schools in New York when they were teaching the primaries they only mentioned the Democratic candidates. Students weren't even aware that the winner of the Democratic primary still had to run against somebody else. I could rattle of many examples but I will opt not to for now.

You mean anecdotal examples, which in a system of 50 million students and 3.2 million teachers, means you have, well...not much.
How about some widespread evidence of this leftist doctrine. Anecdotal evidence need not apply.

[Ruddykath]

Well, I just got back from Florida, after spending nine months trying to get a job teaching and there was none to be had. The text books are lessons in comprehension, more than they are factual. Just this year, evolution is permitted in the curriculum and then it's a discretionary topic, not required.
As far as being a Republican in a Democratic environment. I felt like I was going to be assaulted, several times, for supporting John McCain.

[javsterg]

Stop demonizing teachers. Stop listening to pundits. go to a school and see what teachers do in a day and how little we get payed. In Texas there are no unions, yet I hear jerks on local radio talk about the teacher unions i ruining education. And bags of hot air radio hosts agreeing with them. try it before you form you little opinions or make up situations. As a teacher, I have to teach a content area and if I don't, I get in trouble. I can get written up. I can get but on a growth plan and fired. There are a few bad apples and they get fired unless they coach football. Then they get fired after a losing season. There are very few teachers in math and science and they much rather get payed more for their work and deal with less grief than become a teacher. SO STOP TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT.

[RWReaganfan]

Stop demonizing teachers. Stop listening to pundits. go to a school and see what teachers do in a day and how little we get payed. In Texas there are no unions, yet I hear jerks on local radio talk about the teacher unions i ruining education. And bags of hot air radio hosts agreeing with them. try it before you form you little opinions or make up situations. As a teacher, I have to teach a content area and if I don't, I get in trouble. I can get written up. I can get but on a growth plan and fired. There are a few bad apples and they get fired unless they coach football. Then they get fired after a losing season. There are very few teachers in math and science and they much rather get payed more for their work and deal with less grief than become a teacher. SO STOP TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT.

Stop using "payed" unless you are using a rope. The word is "paid"

[javsterg]

Stop using "payed" unless you are using a rope. The word is "paid"
Actually, I was having one of my student write this while i was reading the newspaper. Sorry, didn't know we were correcting for grammar around here. It is Saturday after all.

[RWReaganfan]

Actually, I was having one of my student write this while i was reading the newspaper. Sorry, didn't know we were correcting for grammar around here. It is Saturday after all.

I usually have the dumbest one in class making up the next test so they will all pass.

Sorry to be a grammar nanny, but it is my pet peeve.

[sandgal]

I teach in North Texas. I would say most of my peers are Republicans. I do not belong to the union because I do not want my union dues to support policies that I oppose.

I taught in CA for one year and it drove me crazy that unless I had a religion waver, I had to join the union. The teachers there were very careful not to go above and beyond what was written in the union contract. It drove me crazy. This was not true for about 6 of the teachers where I taught in CA, but they tried not to let the other teachers see that they were putting in a ton more effort. They didn't want to draw attention to themselves and have other teachers notice that they were not out of the parking lot at 3:30 every day. It was a very strange culture, but we had the head union person on our campus. She ran the school.

[KyrieEleison]

Without going into too much detail I happen to know quite a bit about the subject, public education is inundated with leftist doctrine in a way that no other disclipine besides Academia and the Media could possibly be. I encourage anybody to take out some of the text books required for teacher certification. Also, look at what the students are learning. I found out that in the public schools in New York when they were teaching the primaries they only mentioned the Democratic candidates. Students weren't even aware that the winner of the Democratic primary still had to run against somebody else. I could rattle of many examples but I will opt not to for now.

as could i rabbierric . . . i know at one time, teaching was a very honorable and respectable job (and still is in some ways). Remember now, most of them went to the predominantly leftwing liberal infested four year colleges to get their degrees. So they don't even realize how brainwashed they are and rightfully so are very defensive about their (at one time) honorable line of work. Sure, there are those who are absolutely wonderful teachers. Not all of them are leftwing liberal nutjobs and they genuinelly DO care about the students and do what it takes to make them be successful in the classroom. Some of them don't complain about NCLB and how much money they DON'T make, or belong to that commie organization called the N.E.A. But the sad part is, most of them don't even know why the public school system was brought about. . .

It was to teach students how to read, so they could read The Bible. Try to read a Bible in schools now . . .

Now, these kids are so inundated with not only leftwing liberal doctrine (that the teachers don't even realize they're teaching); they're inundated with too much information PERIOD (like music, art and computers) . I think it's time elementary schools get back to teaching elementary skills (you know as the name "elementary" implies)-reading, writing, and arithmetic and work on the other stuff later on once they've had time to absorb the basics.

I did find sangal's post interesting tho-unlike sandgal i was surrounded by liberal democrats in the public ed system i worked for for 8+ yrs and all i heard was complaining (re: nclb this, nclb that; not enough pay, "working" conditions, bla, bla, bla) ad nauseum. hum . . .

[javsterg]

Perhaps if our children were not subjecting to ideology of "STOP TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING YOU KNOW NOTHING ABOUT" they might be better off than lemmings regurgitating lesson plans. Perhaps if they COULD talk about things they know nothing about, their minds might engage the topics rather than become zombies of them.
Please. This is not a classroom. I'm talking to the people who just come up with stupid ideas about education when the last time they had anything to do with a classroom was when they were listening to what someone on the radio telling their zombies about how bad our schools are compared to the rest of the world. In the rest of the world there is no differentiation in the classroom, because you either learn it or you don't. I make sure my lesson are made so that everyone in my classroom can learn. In other countries Ed and LD students they are not allowed to be in the school. We educate everyone. Its their right. So, I really bothers me when i hear people start repeating what the pundits have to say. Do you know why we have standardized tests? Because test makers want to make loads and loads of money. SO they payed politicians to go around blasting education saying how bad it is. I havnt made a zombie yet, but i have hundreds of life long learners. What classrooms have you visited where this happened? THh one you made up in your head that happened to you or your child doesnt count. The instances you speak of are few and far between. If they happen at the university level, well change you class. But there is really no point in this discussion. People believe what they want to and they will justify it with made up stories. THe same type of stories like "my scholarship was taken away so a woman could play soccer."or "I had the same quilifications as the minority who got the job but i was passed over." Feel free to correct my grammar to make sure my points are missed. I will no longer visit this site because of the zombies who write whatever just because they think it. Then it must be true.

[Texastransplant]

If you're a professional "stooping to be a teacher"...who are you helping? You're probably the bozo real teachers have to constantly save because the kids in the classroom are eating you alive...and you can't handle it...You realized teaching is work......and since it's not a vocation to you..it's simply not worth it.....

I teach in a fairly conservative area...and believe me the parents are coddling these kids to the extreme...they may vote personal responsibility...but it sure doesn't get practiced at home...it's now the teachers' job to do that....but I guess you don't hear about that do you??

[skeena11]

TimeToRelax,

Why aren't you teaching?
You are right that there needs to be more Conservatives teaching.
But there arent enough stepping up to the plate.
I don't mean that all conservatives should be teaching. But more need to.

[YankeeRose1214]

I'm a conservative in the public education system and I wish there were more of us.
I always taught my son to respect the President. Two years ago, during his fourth grade year, he begins ranting about how everything is George Bushes fault and that he hates him. After I got on him about being mouthy and disrespectful, I asked him where he had heard that kind of talk. Well guess who??? His fourth grade teacher!

[JPAD]

Conservatives are smarter and opt for less schooling and focus directly on the fields they wish to enter they make better decisions and do better in life

Liberals are not sure what to do and take a bunch of classes that lead them to nowhere and when they realize they have to eventually pay for thier educations they start teaching because they at that point are only qualified to teach

on the other hand conservatives who teach are either people who wanted to be teacher or people with the education backround who retired from thier careers and dont want to be home or want to do something for thier communitys

[grhayes]

Not sure were to even start on the issue. Between they are not hired as much because of policy. Women in general are hired more often than men for teaching jobs these days which most women seem to be liberal as well. (Not all women)

The way the system is corrupt you can provide your child a better education by working out side the system by home schooling or just putting the time and effort in with your own child. Or as some parents have figured out to start learning workshops for after school time.

If you want to fix the education system you are going to first have to remove the Teacher union, the professional teacher association which determines a lot of what gets taught. Then you are going to have to educate the teachers how to actually teach and not just present material.

If you want to learn how to teach people look at the US naval nuclear program they shove 4 years of college level stuff down your throat in a 2 year period and get you to retain it. While the drop out rate is extremely high it isn't because the way they teach it is because they only want the best.

[pubschteacher]

Not sure were to even start on the issue. Between they are not hired as much because of policy. Women in general are hired more often than men for teaching jobs these days which most women seem to be liberal as well. (Not all women)

Would you care to provide some proof that conservatives are not hired because of "policy"?

If you want to fix the education system you are going to first have to remove the Teacher union, the professional teacher association which determines a lot of what gets taught. Then you are going to have to educate the teachers how to actually teach and not just present material.

Again, care to prove that the teacher associations are setting curriculum?

If you want to learn how to teach people look at the US naval nuclear program they shove 4 years of college level stuff down your throat in a 2 year period and get you to retain it. While the drop out rate is extremely high it isn't because the way they teach it is because they only want the best.

I hope you understand the difference between a young adult in the US naval nuclear program and say...a 7th grade girl.
I guess my next question is...if we adopt this teaching method, what exactly do you have planned for that high number of dropouts?

[Gregor]

Conservatives are smarter and opt for less schooling and focus directly on the fields they wish to enter they make better decisions and do better in life

Liberals are not sure what to do and take a bunch of classes that lead them to nowhere and when they realize they have to eventually pay for thier educations they start teaching because they at that point are only qualified to teach

on the other hand conservatives who teach are either people who wanted to be teacher or people with the education backround who retired from thier careers and dont want to be home or want to do something for thier communitys
Exactly! According to the right: Education is stuipd...I mean stpdi...I mean...wow. Gotta love the extreme right. Only people who feel that school should be skipped because they're already born brilliant. :)):)):)) Explains the whole voting for Bush thing.

[RWReaganfan]

Not sure were to even start on the issue. Between they are not hired as much because of policy. Women in general are hired more often than men for teaching jobs these days which most women seem to be liberal as well. (Not all women)

The way the system is corrupt you can provide your child a better education by working out side the system by home schooling or just putting the time and effort in with your own child. Or as some parents have figured out to start learning workshops for after school time.

If you want to fix the education system you are going to first have to remove the Teacher union, the professional teacher association which determines a lot of what gets taught. Then you are going to have to educate the teachers how to actually teach and not just present material.

If you want to learn how to teach people look at the US naval nuclear program they shove 4 years of college level stuff down your throat in a 2 year period and get you to retain it. While the drop out rate is extremely high it isn't because the way they teach it is because they only want the best.

There are more women in teaching because it does not pay well. The reason it does not pay well is that there are a lot of women in teaching. It is a vicious cycle.

Teacher's unions have ZERO control over what is taught in school. What you said is simply not true.

Your info on the Navy nuclear program is also wrong. It does not take two years, as the training is 6 months classroom and 6 months operational. The instructors are almost entirely Navy personnel.

How do I know this?

1) I am a male teacher with 13 years in the classroom and administration.
2) I am a union member. The state makes the rules. I have also taught in 4 different school districts. The unions were all weak, just like in the rest of the country. If you cannot strike, you can always hold your breath until they give in to your contract demands.
3) I am a former Navy and once served in the nuclear field. That was my first career.

[dosmo66]

I wish more Conservatives would teach in public school. It would no doubt add some balance. But it may be that many of them are not fond of government schools. Republicans often favor home schooling or private schools, where the school is accountable to the parents. They see public schools as accountable to no one.

Conservatives tend to see child rearing as a parental responsibility, not a governmental one. They believe parents should have the right to determine how their children are taught and who teaches them.

Public school educators bemoan the lack of parental involvement with students school work. And it certainly is all too frequently a legitimate complaint. But also common is the tendency of teachers to minimize parental knowledge and skills. It is as if educators are "experts", parents "amateurs", although parents know much more about their own children than any teacher could.

[dosmo66]

There are some Republican teachers. From other posts here, it is obvious that some teach in public schools. Maybe a lot of them end up teaching in private schools. At least all the ones I know, do. They get paid less, but there they can belong to professional organizations other than the NEA.

Our forefathers did put HIGH importance on BASIC EDUCATION. But that didn't always mean government schools to them. A large number of them had a combination home and private education. In fact, when the idea of public schools was first intoduced in the US, it was very controversial. Many people then were also distru****l of the government taking charge of education.

By the way, I wonder why the Obama children aren't in public school?

[TimeToRelax]

I wish more Conservatives would teach in public school. It would no doubt add some balance. But it may be that many of them are not fond of government schools. Republicans often favor home schooling or private schools, where the school is accountable to the parents. They see public schools as accountable to no one.

Conservatives tend to see child rearing as a parental responsibility, not a governmental one. They believe parents should have the right to determine how their children are taught and who teaches them.

Public school educators bemoan the lack of parental involvement with students school work. And it certainly is all too frequently a legitimate complaint. But also common is the tendency of teachers to minimize parental knowledge and skills. It is as if educators are "experts", parents "amateurs", although parents know much more about their own children than any teacher could.

MY parents were able to afford to send me to a Christian private school for K through the 3rd grade. (The school did not have another level beyond the 3rd grade.) The school was Religious in name, mostly, as the only time I remember them emphasizing Christ, was during the Christmas season... the rest of the school year, we just focused on our studies.

What I noticed, was that EVERYONE in the classromm was treated the same. Everyone was expected to behave, and NO ONE was allowed to harass or belittle others. THERE WAS --NO-- MONKEY BUSINESS IN THOSE CLASSROOMS.

There was disipline in the classroom, with the explicit intent that EVERYONE would learn. It was just the right amount of Disicipline --- so that learning would take place. And.... we ---did--- learn.... how to read, how to write, how to spell, and how to do arithmetic.

Then, upon entering the PUBLIC SHCOOL SYSTEM, in the 4th Grade, the first thing I noted, was that the teacher, simply acted as a baby-sitter, and not a good one at that. She was older, and probably near retirement, with her best years behind her --- if she ever had any of those "best" years.

She was stern. There was disipline in the classroom, so that --she-- was not too bothered or disturbed. The happiest part of her day was lunch time, when she could get away form "us".

There was a group of mal-contents in that classroom. They were amazingly allowed to sit together in the same area. I don't recall a one of those mal-contents improving under the leadership and discipline of that teacher.

That teacher must have known that I came from a private school. Maybe that shaded her opinion of me.
I did well, as many of the subjects they were teaching, I had already covered in the 3rd grade, like multiplication, for example.

My opinon is that the Public School System, is an agenda unto itself.

I do know that there are caring and loving teachers in the Public School system of toady, just not enough, for my taste.

BTY, Prayer and Bible reading had been removed from the Public School System by the time I entered 4th Grade.

[Godsavetheusa]

I am a conservative who taught in a public school system for 8 years. I am a highly effective and successful teacher who chose not to be part of the union. BTW, it is well-known who is a member and who isn't. I was accused of cheating (giving students' answers) after my students scored well on their achievement tests. After approximately five years of the same results and having proctors in the room as students took the tests, the accusations ceased. Listening to whiny teachers complain about the lack of parental support (yes, this is a real problem, but eventually you have to look beyond this fact in order to reach these at-risk students) and witnessing a severe lack of classroom management (again, behavior in public schools is a real problem, but effective teachers have good classroom management skills), I chose not to return. A lot of teachers complain about No Child Left Behind. I believe in accountability. It is amazing that bad teachers make exactly the same amount as effective teachers. Maybe that's why conservative teachers are rare in the public school system. It is broken and no amount of money will be able to fix the mess! Government at its best!!!!

[archangelo]

I am a conservative who taught in a public school system for 8 years. I am a highly effective and successful teacher who chose not to be part of the union. BTW, it is well-known who is a member and who isn't. I was accused of cheating (giving students' answers) after my students scored well on their achievement tests. After approximately five years of the same results and having proctors in the room as students took the tests, the accusations ceased. Listening to whiny teachers complain about the lack of parental support (yes, this is a real problem, but eventually you have to look beyond this fact in order to reach these at-risk students) and witnessing a severe lack of classroom management (again, behavior in public schools is a real problem, but effective teachers have good classroom management skills), I chose not to return. A lot of teachers complain about No Child Left Behind. I believe in accountability. It is amazing that bad teachers make exactly the same amount as effective teachers. Maybe that's why conservative teachers are rare in the public school system. It is broken and no amount of money will be able to fix the mess! Government at its best!!!!

Sounds like my story, except that I'm still in it (though NOT the union). Every day I wonder if I'm being complicit in the institutionalized abuse of our children, or if I'm managing to serve as a point of resistance. But I do believe that there are more conservatives in the teaching profession than one would think. As time goes on, more and more reveal themselves to me, and they are becoming impatient. :confused:

[budjaz]

Sounds like my story, except that I'm still in it (though NOT the union). Every day I wonder if I'm being complicit in the institutionalized abuse of our children, or if I'm managing to serve as a point of resistance. But I do believe that there are more conservatives in the teaching profession than one would think. As time goes on, more and more reveal themselves to me, and they are becoming impatient. :confused:

:clap: well my hand goes out to you and the poster you were responding to... I have had bad experiences with public schools and refuse to send my children, but it so wonderful to hear of good conservative teachers.. don't give up.. I guarentee your doing a great big of good =)

[budjaz]

Conservatives are smarter and opt for less schooling and focus directly on the fields they wish to enter they make better decisions and do better in life

Liberals are not sure what to do and take a bunch of classes that lead them to nowhere and when they realize they have to eventually pay for thier educations they start teaching because they at that point are only qualified to teach

on the other hand conservatives who teach are either people who wanted to be teacher or people with the education backround who retired from thier careers and dont want to be home or want to do something for thier communitys

:clap: omg.. I know of 2 teachers personally that did the EXACT thing you mentioned.. one went to school cuz it was the thing to do, took 4 years of school.. told me outright it was the biggest waste of 4 years of her life.. .. guess what??.. she is a teacher now! LOL.. and she is pretty liberal! LOL... that is too funny..

[budjaz]

Well, I just got back from Florida, after spending nine months trying to get a job teaching and there was none to be had. The text books are lessons in comprehension, more than they are factual. Just this year, evolution is permitted in the curriculum and then it's a discretionary topic, not required.
As far as being a Republican in a Democratic environment. I felt like I was going to be assaulted, several times, for supporting John McCain.

oh lawd, be glad you didn't work here in Florida.. i could tell you things that would make you cringe.. like the FCAT tests.. that is ALL they teach all year round, so the kids will pass, so the schools get funding.. pfft.. they teach spanish in kindergarten, but yet the kids passing kindergarten don't know what a vowel is.. some don't even know how to write their name yet, count to 100, etc.. it's pitiful..

and back when I was in high school, I had 2 different teachers tell me to "quit showing off", when I was finished with my work before everyone else and asked for more.. lol.. it's HORRIBLE.. my children will NEVER EVER attend these public schools!

[CaffeineHat]

Sounds like my story, except that I'm still in it (though NOT the union). Every day I wonder if I'm being complicit in the institutionalized abuse of our children, or if I'm managing to serve as a point of resistance. But I do believe that there are more conservatives in the teaching profession than one would think. As time goes on, more and more reveal themselves to me, and they are becoming impatient. :confused:
I'm a liberal and a union member and have been teaching in an at-risk community for 8 years. I attend trainings in the summer and came to teaching as a second career after working for 16 years in the private sector. I don't bring my politics into my classroom. It has no place there. My job as a teacher/technologist is to prepare these students for the the rigors of everyday life in a way that imparts wisdom as well as practical skills. I struggle to get inner city kids to produce videos, power points, spread sheets, podcats and use other technology to communicate their projects and reports. My frustration is with older teachers who are so set in their ways that they won't accept a history project that was created as a website and turned in on a cd-rom because they're convinced that the children are somehow cheating. My frustration is with a system that rewards incompetence (teacher of the year is a popularity contest) and hinders innovation. Some of the best teachers I know are ones who did something else, and then came to teaching because they wanted to have an impact. I think there would be more competent teachers, if more districts offered alternative certification to qualified, educated professionals. Teachers who resort to politics or socially distorted lessons do so out of ignorance or out of a desire to have an impact. My impact is in producing reasonable, logical, thoughtful, innovative and inquisitive learners.

[AccountantNJ]

I minored in Education in college, back when colleges didn't have to offer remedial courses to freshman (oh, excuse me, first year students). There were no jobs then (I lived in NYC, and at the time I graduated, teachers were being "excessed" - that was the euphemism then).

But going from my own experience, please take into account that teachers have been forced to take a passel of expensive, mind-numbing, time-wasting, utterly useless courses in Education. And that requirement is precisely what keeps highly experienced accountants, economists, writers, etc. out of the market. The course requirements are barriers to entry that keep out competition and keep standards lower than they should be.

I remember being scandalized when, as a senior-year student teacher, I heard my supervising teacher say that education courses were "a lot of baloney." I didn't know any better then, but having since obtained a REAL education in law school and B-school, I now know just how right she was. Those professors knew their stuff from years of experience. They would have laughed at anyone who told them they needed to learn how to teach. The next time I saw my supervising teacher, she and I were standing in the same line to buy our first year law school textbooks.

When colleges no longer have to require remedial courses just so students can manage their college courses, I'll know things are getting better.

[AccountantNJ]

Caffeine Hat, congratulations on taking a PROFESSIONAL approach to education and knowing what all teachers should know - your job is to see to it that they have the skills they need to be employable in a rapidly-changing world, and not to present your opinions as facts. It seems that teachers want it both ways - they want the protection of a union, but they want to be thought of as professionals too. But the best lawyers, engineers, and accountants not only know their subject inside and out, they've also learned the disciplined humility that is necessary when working with exacting clients. So they've learned when and where to keep their personal thoughts to themselves.

You are kinder than I would be to teachers who do bring their personal politics into the classroom. I think they do it because they're bored and self-important. They are not on their own time when they're in the classroom, and too many of them act as if they're monarchs in their own Tiny Kingdoms. Kids don't have so much time in classrooms that they can afford to have it wasted.

Teachers like you should be paid like rock stars. It's impossible to even estimate the value teachers like you add to American society, not to mention your active role in making sure that when the time comes to support themselves, they will have everything they need to compete. And the competition is only going to get tougher.

[AccountantNJ]

I went to Catholic school from first grade through high school. I always assumed the nuns were Republicans, maybe because my parents voted that way.

I am grateful to my parents to this day for that. It was free for much of that time, but when the diocese started charging tuition, my parents paid it to keep me there.

[AccountantNJ]

BTY, Prayer and Bible reading had been removed from the Public School System by the time I entered 4th Grade.

We got out of Catholic school early every Wednesday, so that public school kids could get religious instruction.

It was sweet deal! It made me vaguely grateful to the folks who had taken religion out of public schools.

[CaffeineHat]

Caffeine Hat, congratulations on taking a PROFESSIONAL approach to education and knowing what all teachers should know - your job is to see to it that they have the skills they need to be employable in a rapidly-changing world, and not to present your opinions as facts. It seems that teachers want it both ways - they want the protection of a union, but they want to be thought of as professionals too. But the best lawyers, engineers, and accountants not only know their subject inside and out, they've also learned the disciplined humility that is necessary when working with exacting clients. So they've learned when and where to keep their personal thoughts to themselves.

You are kinder than I would be to teachers who do bring their personal politics into the classroom. I think they do it because they're bored and self-important. They are not on their own time when they're in the classroom, and too many of them act as if they're monarchs in their own Tiny Kingdoms. Kids don't have so much time in classrooms that they can afford to have it wasted.

Teachers like you should be paid like rock stars. It's impossible to even estimate the value teachers like you add to American society, not to mention your active role in making sure that when the time comes to support themselves, they will have everything they need to compete. And the competition is only going to get tougher.
Thanks for your kind words. BTW it's 11 am and I'm here posting because I'm home with my own sick child and not chatting on company time. I think you're right about self-importance. Several of our teachers have Obama posters up everywhere in their classrooms. My classroom is lined with posters of work that past students have created and posters that I got as freebies from Dell and Apple. As I said, my pride comes from watching them leave me when they graduate 8th grade and when they come back and tell me about what they're doing later. I have been teaching for 8 years now, and a boy who I taught in 6th grade, who came from a TOUGH neighborhood just got into Morehouse on a scholarship. The reason I know is because he called me to tell me so. I don't discuss politics or my private beliefs with the children. I've heard other teachers ask children about church and family life and cringed because I felt they were getting too close. The union actually protects me against the district which has some "unusual" ideas about how much paperwork I should be generating. Recently my district began using drug dogs to check teachers' cars. Several teachers were arrested and charged with possession for having personal prescription drugs that were not in labeled bottles. I'm not talking about controlled substances, i'm talking about cholesterol drugs and blood pressure meds. It was ridiculous. People ask why more people don't become teachers and I point to the school district and administration. These teachers will surely be vindicated, in one case the medication was for a teacher's deceased father whose car he was driving. In the mean time the union is providing them legal services and assuring they have jobs when everything is cleared.

[ICanHearYou]

This is my first post here so forgive me for its length. I needed to share this with people who would understand.
Why won’t more Republicans become teachers?
Something happened today that just might explain that.
I am currently a student teacher at a school in a state that shall not be named trying my hardest to give my students an education in American History. Recently, my master teacher (the teacher I’m studying under) heard what the Attorney General said about racism and American’s being cowards and thought it would be a great idea to hold a forum on racism after class one day. She invited her fellow teachers to join and when it actually began about 15 were in the group, including two black women (why do I mention the color of their skin? I’ll tell you later).
I truly did think this was a good idea because I wanted to share my views. I truly believe people should be judged by the content of their character and not the color of their skin. I think race is a misnomer and the sooner people realize we are all genetically one race and the only difference between ‘us’ and ‘them’ is the amount of melanin in our skin, the better off we will all be. But people keep giving ‘race’ relevance. They keep putting value on our differences rather than pointing out our similarities. I believe that every ‘race’ has the ability to be racist, and that it is not only white people that can make racist remarks. And I also believe that racism should stop, but the pendulum should not swing the other way to make up for bad deeds done by people who no longer live today.
Right away it was pretty clear that I was the only conservative in the entire group even though I’m the youngest person by almost 20 years. I gave my opinion once and could literally feel the judgment being thrown at me even though no one said a word about what I had said. It went something like this
Me: Why is the Attorney General saying we need to learn about black history to understand our nation’s “racist soul”? There have been loads of other people discriminated against. Why not give attention to everyone else who is not a white protestant land owning male from England?
The group: (no response, just wow- this-girl-is-stupid stares) Why they gave me those stares, I don’t know.
Then the conversation turns toward Obama and how wonderful he is.
Teacher 1: “Do you think he would have been elected if both his parents were black?”
Teacher 2: “Why no, he needed his white mother to get votes because I’m convinced many middle American’s would not have voted for an all black candidate.”
Me: (thinking) So it’s now OK to say discriminatory remarks about middle Americans at a discussion trying to decrease discrimination?
Then the conversation turned toward how racist people (more specifically Republicans) are if they say they want President Obama to fail. They quoted Rush Limbaugh…or rather, misquoted him, and were quite pleased with themselves for calling out a suspected racist. I, on the other hand, wanted to correct their misquote but by this point I was so frustrated that if I dared open my mouth, nothing nice would come out. I wish I could be strong enough to voice my opinions, but I’m just not. My mother always taught me to say nothing if I couldn’t say anything nice.
Next, Alexandria Pelosi’s documentary, a gross exaggeration of conservative America, was brought up and everyone (but me) became extremely animated when discussing how hateful Republican’s are. One teacher even said she was afraid of Republicans…
Thankfully, my master teacher knew I was a conservative and tried to steer the conversation away from bashing them when the teachers (at least most of them) didn’t know a Republican was in the room. (I really like my master teacher, she is a truly good teacher and the students love her. Even though she and I don’t have similar political views, she at least keeps her conservative bashing to hushed conversations with fellow teachers when she thinks I’m not around) When the documentary was being discussed I wanted to bang my head on a table and yell at all of them. Did they not realize they are doing the exact thing they were in that room to try and prevent? They may not have been discriminating against people because of their skin color, but they were certainly discriminating against people because of their political beliefs. And they used some pretty hurtful words.
Again, I wish I could have spoken up and defended conservatives, but I literally had tears in my eyes over the things being said. I felt so helpless, so useless and so weak that all of my energy went into not bursting into tears right then and there. Maybe I’m too sensitive, but I do make a conscious effort not to make hurtful generalizations. Just as I believe in Dr. King’s words about judging people on the content of their character, I also believe in the Golden Rule. I try to treat people the way I expect to be treated; with respect.
Finally, the PC way to describe a person of color was discussed. This is where every white person in the group looked to the two black ladies and asked them for their guidance. How would they like to be called? African-American? Black? Black-American?
They were also asked into which category should Obama be placed into since his black ancestry was not a part of American slavery. Black African-American of Non-American Slavery Descent? Say that three times fast.
Everyone was pandering to these women! I couldn’t believe it.
Did these two black women suddenly become experts on categorizing people according to skin color vs. family ancestry vs. family’s presence in historical social conflicts? Is there even such a thing? If so then call me a White European/Native American-American of…oh wait a minute, my white side just kicked my Native American side off of its land and forced it onto a reservation. So I really don’t know what that makes me now. Maybe just an American.
The only thing I could think of at this point was how ridiculous this all was. There was no open discussion of racism. There were no hard questions to answer and ponder. The only thing going on was a liberal love fest. They all agreed that American’s are racist cowards, well everyone but them, they also agreed that Republicans are scary, evil people, and finally, that they should continue this discussion at a later date.
I was 100% sure if I said any of this during the discussion I would have been, at the very least, yelled at and told how wrong my opinions were.
On the car ride home I was disappointed in everything. I was disappointed in myself for not speaking up, I was disappointed in the teachers for discriminating others while discussing how not to discriminate, and I was disappointed that the public school system is so lopsided that conservative views are scorned.
Anyway, to close this ridiculously long post I want to add that for a second I wondered just why I was putting myself through this. All of the above is exactly why there are very few conservative teachers.

[2jobteacher]

I'm a conservative teacher and many of my peers are also. I do not talk about about my religion (I'm not Christian), politics or race at school unless I know were everyone stands around me or within earshot. Conservatives will make huge differences in public schools. I believe in them.
I work at a State & National School of Character. We didn't get there by being liberal in our expectations. Set the bar high and do not back down when it comes to what children can learn. Many good wishes to you in your career.

[budjaz]

OMG.. ICanHearYou.. wow.. I don't how you stayed in that room!! I feel for you.. that is absolutely awful.. I guess you have successfully summed up the reasoning of why more republicans are not teachers, in this 1 post.. great post.. just don't give up and don't lose faith =)

[jajjacobs]

I am a public educator who works with many schools. During my teaching career I worked in high-achieving schools. I currently work in "failing" schools..."failing" as defined by NCLB. Let me tell you...there are no failing schools. There are great teachers in "failing" schools and horrible teachers in high-performing schools. Too make a blanket statement about public education based on minimal experience, namely your own, is ridiculous.

As for standardized tests....NCLB requires that all tests are based on the standards for each grade level. You can't knock your teachers for "teaching the test" because the TEST is whatever your state said they would do! The FCAT is based on what Florida students are supposed to know and be able to do at the grade level. Teachers are legally bound to teach those standards. "Teaching the test" (aka "teaching the FCAT") is not a valid argument anymore....it is what Florida said that it would do all along. Now they are just measuring their own standards!

[Amallek]

You have to have a college degree to be a teacher.

And education cures conservatism.

[jajjacobs]

Interesting question. I'm afraid I don't know the true answer. But lets look at some of the stereotypes here, to see if we can't find something. And I'm just throwing stuff out here, so don't get too worked up about it.

#1- Republicans are self starters, they don't like government interference. Well, education is a huge beuracracy. You get lots of people telling you how to do your job on a daily basis.

#2- Republicans are more businesslike, democrats are more emotional- There are certainly a lot of teachers who are pretty cold, and run their classroom according to certain rules. But most teachers do have more sensativity, and a nurturing side, especially at the lower grade levels.

#3 - Republican's like money. Some people say teachers make too much, others too little. Teachers do on average make more than the average American worker, but they make less than other professions that require a masters degree. So if you are looking to get a higher degree for the purpose of making money, there are other professions where you will make more based on the time you put into it.

#4- Teaching is a profession run by liberals. If you are a republican in college, surrounded by liberal professors, liberal students, the last thing you are going to want to do after 4 years is go into a profession that has the reputation of being liberal. You're not going to want to spend any more time hanging out with liberals. Republicans, even teachers, generally don't like teachers unions, or at least their politics. So since the perception is that teachers associations are all a bunch of liberals, they stay away. Then they try and change education from the outside, rather than the inside.

BTW, I am a republican HS teacher. I am a science teacher, but our HS history department is 3/4ths conservative as well. There were times I thought about quitting, and doing something else, but once you see the state of American Education, and some of the kids, you realize that the best way to help is from the inside. Every day, I'm in a battle with these kids who are right on the borderline of really making something of themselves, or ending up failures who are going to rely on the system and not really contribute anything back to society. Once you've been a part of that, and had some success getting kids on the right path, it's really hard to walk away and go sell insurance for a living or something like that. Since you know the battles going to go on either way, you just aren't going to be a part of it.

GOOD FOR YOU! I am also a conservative...who was a history teacher. That is not uncommon in Red States.

[budjaz]

As for standardized tests....NCLB requires that all tests are based on the standards for each grade level. You can't knock your teachers for "teaching the test" because the TEST is whatever your state said they would do! The FCAT is based on what Florida students are supposed to know and be able to do at the grade level. Teachers are legally bound to teach those standards. "Teaching the test" (aka "teaching the FCAT") is not a valid argument anymore....it is what Florida said that it would do all along. Now they are just measuring their own standards!

yea you have a point, HOWEVER, why is it that even though that is all they teach the whole entire year, every school in this district has failed to the meet the test results of the FCATS every year.. parents that are friends of mine got letters from the school stating that they are suggested to get a tutor for their student in addition to their public school education or switch schools because the school was rated so low by the state.. and in all reality if you just TEACH what children should know, they would pass the FCATs with flying colors, there would be no need to teach only the test.. and it is not unreasonable to base an opinion of public schools by your own personal experience and experience of those around you, that is what we as humans are supposed to do.. experience, decide how that experience was and make your next step based on that experience.. I homeschool my children, I can PROMISE you that my son will pass the standardized testing in the top percents compared to the public schools and I have no clue what is on those tests.. so I don't have the ability to "teach the test".. but I teach him .. and he gets taught well..

[archangelo]

I'm a liberal and a union member and have been teaching in an at-risk community for 8 years. I attend trainings in the summer and came to teaching as a second career after working for 16 years in the private sector. I don't bring my politics into my classroom. It has no place there. My job as a teacher/technologist is to prepare these students for the the rigors of everyday life in a way that imparts wisdom as well as practical skills. I struggle to get inner city kids to produce videos, power points, spread sheets, podcats and use other technology to communicate their projects and reports. My frustration is with older teachers who are so set in their ways that they won't accept a history project that was created as a website and turned in on a cd-rom because they're convinced that the children are somehow cheating. My frustration is with a system that rewards incompetence (teacher of the year is a popularity contest) and hinders innovation. Some of the best teachers I know are ones who did something else, and then came to teaching because they wanted to have an impact. I think there would be more competent teachers, if more districts offered alternative certification to qualified, educated professionals. Teachers who resort to politics or socially distorted lessons do so out of ignorance or out of a desire to have an impact. My impact is in producing reasonable, logical, thoughtful, innovative and inquisitive learners.

I would be both relieved and honored to be able to teach on a staff that included you!

[blkconserve]

TimetoRelax I am a black conservative Teacher. Unlike you I do not hold my tongue I stand up for the right and will continue to do so. I get stare's and rolled eyes but I don't care. The liberal teachers stay far away from me, making nasty comments to the students about me. But, none of them are brave enough to approach me. I just recently found out we had a gay club in school. I asked the Principal if I could sponsor a young conservative club I have yet to here from her. So you are not alone in the public school system.

[Army of 1]

I am a teacher and a very conservative republican. I fail to see why teachers are democrats. Being from Illinois I doubly cursed as a teacher but I continue to ask my collegues exactly what our Illinois demos have done for our schools/teachers. I do realize that texts are written very liberal but how can anyone in this role not believe in the power of each person/student to help themselves? Heck, we are counting on it!

I also believe that there are few reason to bring your own politics openly into a classroom. teach the material without bias.
that being said, I recently subbed in another classroom that happened to be a government class. On the board they had a T graph of republican and democratic party ideals. It was unbelievably biased.

[budjaz]

TimetoRelax I am a black conservative Teacher. Unlike you I do not hold my tongue I stand up for the right and will continue to do so. I get stare's and rolled eyes but I don't care. The liberal teachers stay far away from me, making nasty comments to the students about me. But, none of them are brave enough to approach me. I just recently found out we had a gay club in school. I asked the Principal if I could sponsor a young conservative club I have yet to here from her. So you are not alone in the public school system.
:clap:

[dosmo66]

You have to have a college degree to be a teacher.

And education cures conservatism.

It's not a guaranteed "cure". I know too many Phd's (mostly in the hard sciences and engineering) who are strong conservatives.
But unlike liberals, they don't consider themselves elite bacause of their education.

[Greyclouds]

It's not a guaranteed "cure". I know too many Phd's (mostly in the hard sciences and engineering) who are strong conservatives.
But unlike liberals, they don't consider themselves elite bacause of their education.

Elitism and Liberalism are not mutually inclusive. Elitism and Conservatism are also not mutually exclusive. There are elite conservatives as well as elite liberals. There are also people of both stripes who do not feel superior to their common man.


For example (and this is NOT an intentional caricature of anyone on this board): a Christian conservative who seeks to impose core Christian values on the American Legal system and insists that this country is a Christian nation is an example of conservative elitism.

Likewise, a complete economic liberal who seeks to literally impose the full tenants of communism without recourse or amendment on this nation's economic system is an example of liberal elitism.


Hopefully, both examples are on the fringe; however, both sides view their counterparts as being the "predominant" theory for the opposition. Not all conservatives wish to impose religious values on the law, and not all liberals wish to impose communist economic theory on our economy.

[budjaz]

Elitism and Liberalism are not mutually inclusive. Elitism and Conservatism are also not mutually exclusive. There are elite conservatives as well as elite liberals. There are also people of both stripes who do not feel superior to their common man.


For example (and this is NOT an intentional caricature of anyone on this board): a Christian conservative who seeks to impose core Christian values on the American Legal system and insists that this country is a Christian nation is an example of conservative elitism.

Likewise, a complete economic liberal who seeks to literally impose the full tenants of communism without recourse or amendment on this nation's economic system is an example of liberal elitism.


Hopefully, both examples are on the fringe; however, both sides view their counterparts as being the "predominant" theory for the opposition. Not all conservatives wish to impose religious values on the law, and not all liberals wish to impose communist economic theory on our economy.

bleh, I disagree completely. ... conservatives who want religious values in the law are not elitists.. IMO.. they are true conservatives who know what this nation was founded upon.. and the only religious values that most of them want have to do with the abortions.. calling someone a conservative elitist because they want those sort of religious values in the law is false, it is merely a human being trying to protect another human being, and most of all, knowing that it is against what God would want =)

[Greyclouds]

bleh, I disagree completely. ... conservatives who want religious values in the law are not elitists.. IMO.. they are true conservatives who know what this nation was founded upon.. and the only religious values that most of them want have to do with the abortions.. calling someone a conservative elitist because they want those sort of religious values in the law is false, it is merely a human being trying to protect another human being, and most of all, knowing that it is against what God would want =)

So... their values are better than our values? Even better than the bill of rights values that tolerate different opinions?

See what I mean :cool:

[¿Como?]

So... their values are better than our values? Even better than the bill of rights values that tolerate different opinions?

See what I mean :cool:

What if you simply remove the term "Christian" from the phrase "Christian values."

Are conservatives who want our system of laws based on our values still "elitist?"

Don't get me wrong: Jesus came as a spiritual leader and specifically had nothing to do with the politics of that day: It was that part of His ministry that was so misunderstood ... and eventually rejected ... by the religious leaders of that day. They were expecting a political king to take it to Rome.

So I am not in favor of insisting on codifying "christian" values (e.g. a constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage). But I do consider my conservative values every bit as compelling as (and, in most cases, mirrors of) my Christian values.

I also see most of this as a State's rights issue: Even in cases where a state code is contrary to what I value as a Conservative and a Christian (e.g. California's "Domestic Partnership" code), I will accept it (with only SOME argument :razz: ) if it's enacted by states instead of the fed.

como

[Greyclouds]

What if you simply remove the term "Christian" from the phrase "Christian values."

Are conservatives who want our system of laws based on our values still "elitist?"

Don't get me wrong: Jesus came as a spiritual leader and specifically had nothing to do with the politics of that day: It was that part of His ministry that was so misunderstood ... and eventually rejected ... by the religious leaders of that day. They were expecting a political king to take it to Rome.

So I am not in favor of insisting on codifying "christian" values (e.g. a constitutional amendment banning homosexual marriage). But I do consider my conservative values every bit as compelling as (and, in most cases, mirrors of) my Christian values.

I also see most of this as a State's rights issue: Even in cases where a state code is contrary to what I value as a Conservative and a Christian (e.g. California's "Domestic Partnership" code), I will accept it (with only SOME argument :razz: ) if it's enacted by states instead of the fed.

como

I'm of the traditional political compass perspective.

Four corners, with each having different interpretations on the role of government divided under two disciplines.

Conservatives: believe government should only occupy itself with enforcement of Social Issues and values.

Liberals: believe government should only occupy itself with enforcement of economic issues.

Authoritarians: believe government should occupy itself with enforcement of BOTH economic and social issues.

Libertarians: believe government has no place in either regard.


If an "elite liberal" is a person with a political propensity to advocate the use of government to level an economic playing field, then is not an "elite conservative" a person who seeks to use government to instill certain values upon others?

If we approach political "eliteness" from another standpoint (arrogance), are not both ideologies prone to hubris?

"The founding fathers wanted THESE values."

"The founding fathers wanted THIS social mobility."

So, it all depends on how you define "elite." I personally see it as a tendency towards hubris in decision making, or an abrupt intolerance of other viewpoints.

[Nevarwinter]

The best explanation i've heard is that Republicans won't work for 30,000 a year.

[Greyclouds]

The best explanation i've heard is that Republicans won't work for 30,000 a year.

Of course! And it's also a reason why there are so few teachers to begin with!

Imagine that you could be doing a very very mindless job, like McDonald's food prep, and earn nearly as much.

[monkeymom]

It's not impossible, but if you are picking a profession for yourself for the rest of your life, you want to pick the best one, one with the fewest negatives. And I think that for some people, after being a part of the liberal establishment during college, the idea of spending the rest of their careers with liberals might not be the most appealing. And I'm just making guesses here. I'm a republican who did go into teaching, so I'm not an expert on why republicans don't. We're all just throwing out ideas here, whats yours?

I have to agree with you to a point page. I am in college now, finishing my MA and teaching credential. As much as I love some of my professors, and enjoy school in general, it does get tiring being on the defense ALL the time. And I am really lucky in that regard because I am a "non-traditional" student (read "old lady"), so I think sometimes it's easier for me to get into certain kinds of discussions with professors/students.

I know a lot of teachers - 2 of my kids included - who are Conservative/Republican but keep it to themselves pretty much because they just don't want to get into politics with their colleagues. They certainly keep their politics out of the classroom, which everyone should do but all too often don't.

[Greyclouds]

I have to agree with you to a point page. I am in college now, finishing my MA and teaching credential. As much as I love some of my professors, and enjoy school in general, it does get tiring being on the defense ALL the time. And I am really lucky in that regard because I am a "non-traditional" student (read "old lady"), so I think sometimes it's easier for me to get into certain kinds of discussions with professors/students.

I know a lot of teachers - 2 of my kids included - who are Conservative/Republican but keep it to themselves pretty much because they just don't want to get into politics with their colleagues. They certainly keep their politics out of the classroom, which everyone should do but all too often don't.

We can agree that politics belongs in a poly sci class; not in any other setting. It is unprofessional to discuss politics with colleagues or students even outside the classroom!

[RWReaganfan]

We can agree that politics belongs in a poly sci class; not in any other setting. It is unprofessional to discuss politics with colleagues or students even outside the classroom!

Outside the classroom is the perfect setting to discuss politics. How else can we show liberals how really ignorant they are? Perhaps no one has ever showed them the flaw in their thinking.

[KyanWan]

The bulk of my trade skills I've learned from:

- Self learning - on my own time
- Business venture
- Working

What education did - was give me some discipline in my trade. I can tell you, though - education alone is completely insufficient to be successful. You need more than that.

And it's my opinion - that privately run schools, with reasonable tuition - which can be deducted in full from your annual tax payments ... are superior to public schools.

With the tax we pay to support public schooling for nonproductive citizens - we could send an extra 10 students to a private school.

If someone wishes to be lazy, or not work - tough. They should force themselves to remove their body from in front of the television, computer, xbox - and work.

:boohoo:

With the effort I see on the part of the so-called "downtrodden" to pick themselves out of the cesspool (they're free to do such at ANY TIME. They just need to want to - prove me wrong.) - I'm honestly sick of hearing it at this point. If you're going to be a loser, don't be a loser on my dime. I'd rather see my tax dollars go to a tough, hardworking young Soldiers & Marines - than some stoners in San Francisco].

[Greyclouds]

The bulk of my trade skills I've learned from:

- Self learning - on my own time
- Business venture
- Working

What education did - was give me some discipline in my trade. I can tell you, though - education alone is completely insufficient to be successful. You need more than that.

And it's my opinion - that privately run schools, with reasonable tuition - which can be deducted in full from your annual tax payments ... are superior to public schools.

With the tax we pay to support public schooling for nonproductive citizens - we could send an extra 10 students to a private school.

If someone wishes to be lazy, or not work - tough. They should force themselves to remove their body from in front of the television, computer, xbox - and work.

:boohoo:

With the effort I see on the part of the so-called "downtrodden" to pick themselves out of the cesspool (they're free to do such at ANY TIME. They just need to want to - prove me wrong.) - I'm honestly sick of hearing it at this point. If you're going to be a loser, don't be a loser on my dime. I'd rather see my tax dollars go to a tough, hardworking young Soldiers & Marines - than some stoners in San Francisco].

While I agree with you on the self-learning aspect, I have to ask you about your feelings on unemployment welfare.

Should the people who lost their jobs be losers on their own dimes as well?

[Chucky]

I had my suspicions on the answer to the OP, but having just talked to a friend who is considering a teaching career, I found some support.

She's doing substitute teaching and mentoring on her way to getting a teaching certificate. She gets all kinds of pamphlets and books for recommended reading.

One book she got was "It's Your World, If You Don't Like It, Change It - Activism for Teenagers". At first, she thought it would be a good resource for getting kids involved in society, in a "community civics" sort of way. She let me go through it because it was just too unbelievable.

The section titles:
Helping Animals
Fighting Racism
Saving the Environment
Ending War
Fighting the Spread of HIV/AIDS
Stopping School Violence and Bullying
Defending Women's Rights
Protecting Civil Rights and Civil Liberties
Promoting Tolerence Toward Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Youth

"Helping Animals" isn't about responsible per ownership. It's mentions the Humane Societ, but it's more about PETA (which the book recommends for additional information), getting people aware of "animal cruelty", getting the school to have a "Meat-out" day. Not a peep about 4-H.

"Fighting Racism" sounds reasonable, but everything in the chapter focuses on "hate crimes", with whites doing the hating. Hate against blacks, latinos, Jews, Muslims - but never whites or Christians.

"Saving the Environment" is all about rooting out businesses that pollute, the evils of oil and coal, and nuclear power, etc. Nothing even about littering.

"Ending War" is merely blind pacifism, getting anything hinting of the military off campus and denegrated as much as possible, thus promoting "peace".

"Fighting the Spread of HIV/AIDS" is all about sex education, tolerance of lifestyles that are associated with AIDS. Nope, nothing about abstinence. And no mention of cancer, malaria, or any other disease that kills more than AIDS.

"Stopping School Violence and Bullying" was full of kindergarten level suggestions, like a "bully-corner" - I guess for a time-out punishment.

"Defending Women's Rights" was, of course, all about abortion rights, free condoms and the pill. Again, nothing about abstinence.

"Protecting Civil Rights and Civil Liberties" was a rehash of the racism chapter, with freedom of speech thrown in. Nothing about protecting the right to bear arms.

"Promoting Tolerence Toward Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Questioning Youth" - the title is pretty self-explanatory. (to be clear, though, Questioning Youth is about they should all be "questioning" their sexuality - just in case they might "really" be gay)


The bottom line is that conservative ethics and morals are, at best, ignored, mostly belittled, and, at worst, characterized as the source of the world's evil.

And, no, there were no books recommended that provided a balancing view, or balancing suggestions for teenage activism. It was all left and far left propaganda.

That's why conservatives (Republicans and Democrats alike) don't get into teaching: the atmosphere is blatantly slanted against them. So conservatives instead look to alternatives: homeschooling and private schooling.

[Apatriot]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

I believe that there are a lot of Republicans in teaching. I am a Republican and I used to teach. I have taught with several ditto heads, and my wife is a Republican (and is an assistant principal). The thing is, most Republicans in teaching are very principled. We don't believe in using our classroom as a bully pulpit to spread our views. Unfortunately, most liberal teachers don't feel that same way.

Overall, I would be that the percentag of Republicans in teaching is slightly below the percentage of democrats, but not by more than 10% or so.

[Apatriot]

Because to be a public school teacher you have to be a member of the Teacher's Union, and the Teacher's Union is LIBERAL.

Depends on the state. In most of the Southeast you DON'T have to be a member of the union to work in a public school. I've gotten jobs in two different states without having to join the Union. I joined the Union afterwards, because as a science teacher it would be foolish not to have the $1 million liability insurance that they provided as part of the membership. (you never know what might happen when doing a lab). My wife got a teaching job in a 3rd state without being a Union member.

Republicans want to EDUCATE children, not INDOCTRINATE THEM. The teacher's union is not about educating children. Like all unions it's meant to protect it's members, whether they are doing a good job or not.

And why wouldn't a Republican want job protection?

That contradicts the mission of education. Further, since the Teacher's Union is liberal and, like all unions, supports democrats because they protect unions to the detriment of everything else, education would contradict the interests of the Democrats.

Teachers are not saints, nor should they be required to sacrifice themselves at the altar of their students. Protecting your professional wellbeing is important for all.

Educated people aren't stupid enough to fall for mindless Democrat rhetoric about class envy, thus Democrats and the Teacher's Union do NOT want a well educated populace.

I disagree. I taught with plenty of Democratic union member teachers. They certainly wanted a well educated populace, just like I did. If nothing else, we recognize that our retirement is dependent on a productive populace, and the only way to have one is to educate people.

As Sean often says, liberals are well-meaning people, just like we are, I just disagree with their philosophy and their views. They don't have any conspiracy to dumb down America and ruin it.

That's why Republicans are for things like class vouchers, more private and religious education, THEY ACTUALLY DO THE DAMN JOB OF EDUCATING.


I'm not. Vouchers are useless in helping education. Religious education should be by parents, not by the schools. I've been a Republican my whole life, but I think both of the above are not properly Republican issues. They are religious right issues. I'm not part of the religious right, despite being religious and right wing.

[Apatriot]

Oh. Well we don't have bumper stickers on our cars (can't say I've ever seen a political one), and, evidently, we have a lot more fun at lunch than you do. My husband's school sounds closer to yours, but the majority are republicans. I think where you live matters. Long Island has many republican strongholds and so the majority of teachers there are representative of the population.


That's generally my observation as well. Teachers are only slightly more liberal than the population at large in a community.

[Apatriot]

I will never understand a teacher putting a bumper sticker on his/her car that will be parked at school. I've had this argument with my husband who insisted on putting his Obama sticker on his car.

My job is to create an environment for my students that is comfortable for ALL, regardless of their individual leanings, political or otherwise. I can't really do that if I've advertised my vote. Some will end up feeling disenfranchised and putting my students before my politics is key to my profession. I realize you have the right to do it. I realize it's free speech. I just don't get why you would want to alienate those who need to feel included in your classes.

BTW: I hope you called the police on the vandal and pressed charges.

I'm with you. Teachers (of either political stripe) shouldn't have political bumper stickers. It's unprofessional.

[Apatriot]

Association? It's a UNION! Unions are NOT voluntary! :))

They are in the Southeast or other "Right to work" states.

[Apatriot]

When (under that crappy Goals 2000) my daughter's teacher praised my daughter's reading scores and ability, she lowered her voice to a whisper and said to me, "You've been teacher her phonics at home, haven't you?" (which I had. It was pretty obvious under the Clinton admin's Goal's 2000, it was the only way she was going to learn to read)

As IF teaching phonics is some kind of CONSPIRACY we don't dare say allowed. You want to know why Clinton kept talking about kids being able to read by fourth grade it was the stupid Goals 2000. Phonics was verboten under it, for that STUPID creative spelling. It was horrible AND COMPLETELY STUPID.

Teaching phonics is part of teaching reading here in Florida. My oldest son cannot master phonics (had to do with his speech delay), but can read fairly well. Thankfully, the teachers taught reading the way it should be taught--with a combination of methods including phonics and sight reading.

[Apatriot]

..really? I'd say the pay is pretty good considering they only work 8-9 months a year .....:rolleyes:



Teachers in most states work 190 contract days a year. (not counting the weekend days that most use to catch up on grading and lesson planning).

A fulltime job with 2 weeks of vacation and federal holidays off is 240 days a year. If we consider that a 12 month a year job, teaching would be a 9.5 month a year job. It pays like a 9.5 month a year job.

[Apatriot]

Would you care to provide some proof to your assertion that conservatives are not welcome in K-12 public schools in this country. Anecdotal evidence is not going to cut it.
School districts in Colorado have a standardized set of questions for applicants, none of which have anything to do with a person's politics.


It is illegal job discrimination to ask an employee or potential employee about political views.

[Apatriot]

Every new teacher hired must be approved by the selection committee of the district. The selection committee is compoised of current teachers, and they have their own set of questions and interview technicques.

That is not anecdotal, it is actual practice of what occurs in the hiring process. :D

Jim, that may be true for your state, but it seems that Colorado has a different process. As you know, educational procedures vary state by state.

[Apatriot]

I minored in Education in college, back when colleges didn't have to offer remedial courses to freshman (oh, excuse me, first year students). There were no jobs then (I lived in NYC, and at the time I graduated, teachers were being "excessed" - that was the euphemism then).

IMHO, remedial courses are the colleges fault not the secondary schools--the colleges want to take students that should not be in college, so they set up remedial courses, which are a moneymaker in two ways. One, they require the students who shouldn't be in college anyway to take them. Two, most remedial classes don't count in terms of graduation, so they get an extra semester or two of tuition from those kids.

But going from my own experience, please take into account that teachers have been forced to take a passel of expensive, mind-numbing, time-wasting, utterly useless courses in Education. And that requirement is precisely what keeps highly experienced accountants, economists, writers, etc. out of the market. The course requirements are barriers to entry that keep out competition and keep standards lower than they should be.

I agree and disagree. Some of the courses are mindnumbing and worthless. Others are great. However, that occurs in every field. Some would argue the same about any curriculum.

I remember being scandalized when, as a senior-year student teacher, I heard my supervising teacher say that education courses were "a lot of baloney." I didn't know any better then, but having since obtained a REAL education in law school and B-school, I now know just how right she was. Those professors knew their stuff from years of experience. They would have laughed at anyone who told them they needed to learn how to teach. The next time I saw my supervising teacher, she and I were standing in the same line to buy our first year law school textbooks.

IMHO, your supervising teacher's attitude is why American education stagnates. If new ideas are automatically rejected (which they are), then better ideas will never be used, and teachers in 2009 will be using the same tired old techniques that bored students in 1959.

When teaching motivated people (i.e. adults and college students), you don't need to know much about teaching to teach. When teaching unmotivated people (i.e. kids), you do.

When colleges no longer have to require remedial courses just so students can manage their college courses, I'll know things are getting better.

You're placing the blame for remedial courses on the wrong group. College admissions people shouldn't be taking in people who need remedial courses. Those people should be in junior or community colleges which are set up for remediation.

[NYPiper79]

You must know that even if the teacher is republican, they may be required by the state to teach certain material or viewpoints that they may or may not agree with. Often times, textbook and book authors may have their own biased opinions, but their books are required

[RickL]

. If new ideas are automatically rejected (which they are), then better ideas will never be used, and teachers in 2009 will be using the same tired old techniques that bored students in 1959.




.

The problem is the opposite. New ideas are NEVER rejected. Districts spend millions on some gobbly-gook "modern" technique only to trash it a year or two later and spend millions on some newer and goblier gobbly-gook stuff.

To NYPiper:

I have been teaching American History for almost 2 decades and I have never been required to teach any viewpoint whatsoever.

But, conservatives ought to keep that possibility you raise in mind when they trash tenure. Tenure is all that stands between me and the possibility of being fired as a "bad" teacher when some ultra-liberal principal insists that I teach HIS "viewpoints" regarding American History.

Regards,

Rick

[Apatriot]

The problem is the opposite. New ideas are NEVER rejected. Districts spend millions on some gobbly-gook "modern" technique only to trash it a year or two later and spend millions on some newer and goblier gobbly-gook stuff.

It's because the new ideas are not really being used, not because they are being accepted. My wife is a big proponent of brain-based teaching methods (the "brand name" of this is Kagan). These aren't traditional methods, but they work much better than traditional methods do. My wife, using these methods, produced a much better result with worse students than any other teacher in her subject/grade level. However, most teachers reject these methods as being too much work, etc. What you talk about above is not the use of new methods, but the rejection of new methods. If the so-called "gobbledy gook" is truly used, most of it does work, and it works better than old-fashioned lecture and repetition techniques.

[oneofthefew]

If, as a conservative-minded teacher, I were to tell the truth about any given topic relating to the current administration, it would lead to questions, discussions, and learning....that all sounds great....unless you recognize that those discussions might possibly be repeated at home and in the event that were to occur, if conservative ideologies were in the mix, I would be reported and definitely have a problem on my hands. Still, as I am currently teaching on Socialism and Marxism etc, it is difficult to steer clear of making the obvious relationship between those ideologies and the current ideologies of the administration. I refuse to lie to these students and if they take the information and begin to spread it around, (because...quoting my students..."it makes sense"), we can only benefit as a society. It would be a travesty if I were to give up on this opportunity I have been given to influence young minds in the areas of morals and politics.

[docjp]

If, as a conservative-minded teacher, I were to tell the truth about any given topic relating to the current administration, it would lead to questions, discussions, and learning....that all sounds great....unless you recognize that those discussions might possibly be repeated at home and in the event that were to occur, if conservative ideologies were in the mix, I would be reported and definitely have a problem on my hands. Still, as I am currently teaching on Socialism and Marxism etc, it is difficult to steer clear of making the obvious relationship between those ideologies and the current ideologies of the administration. I refuse to lie to these students and if they take the information and begin to spread it around, (because...quoting my students..."it makes sense"), we can only benefit as a society. It would be a travesty if I were to give up on this opportunity I have been given to influence young minds in the areas of morals and politics.

The media, most of the population, and certainly most teachers today are Liberal or Left-Hemisphere of the brain oriented, and thus opposed to anything that suggests "personal responsibility" or that one not identify oneself with fear and negativity as threatening..... alas, they do not realize they fear the YANG energy of their own MIND realms, and delusionally see those who are not afraid as the enemy and in need of censorship.

[docjp]

If, as a conservative-minded teacher, I were to tell the truth about any given topic relating to the current administration, it would lead to questions, discussions, and learning....that all sounds great....unless you recognize that those discussions might possibly be repeated at home and in the event that were to occur, if conservative ideologies were in the mix, I would be reported and definitely have a problem on my hands. Still, as I am currently teaching on Socialism and Marxism etc, it is difficult to steer clear of making the obvious relationship between those ideologies and the current ideologies of the administration. I refuse to lie to these students and if they take the information and begin to spread it around, (because...quoting my students..."it makes sense"), we can only benefit as a society. It would be a travesty if I were to give up on this opportunity I have been given to influence young minds in the areas of morals and politics.

The media, most of the population, and certainly most teachers today are Liberal or Left-Hemisphere of the brain oriented, and thus opposed to anything that suggests "personal responsibility" and see those who DO NOT identify themselves with fear and negativity as threatening..... alas, they do not realize they fear the YANG energy of their own MIND realms, and delusionally see those who are not afraid as the enemy and in need of censorship.

[docjp]

The REASON you have not been asked to teach other than what is in the books is that what is in the books is propaganda written by the delusional thinking of LIberals who hate and fear American "personal responsibility" and will do everything they can do to undermind and destroy America.

[docjp]

Philosophy of teachers.... perhaps the reason the majority of teachers are Liberal because of the old saying: If you cannot do it, teach it. Fear held at a fully non-conscious level within Liberals causes them to pursue those professionals where the Left-Hemisphere of the brain is the only thing one needs to use. This is of course a subtle phenomenon and not something one would perceive via ones one thinking...

[Liberty1980]

I'm a conservative and I'm in school to get my degree to teach secondary social studies.

My one thing I plan to stress is a weekly journal. I will encourage my students to report on one article they read that week and discuss how it effects them. I think this will allow them to read papers, articles, magazines, etc. and learn to be selective on their materials since they are doing more than rewriting the article. This way they will not pick a random article and just paraphrase it.

I had a teacher in HS that did this each week, but he only had us write a paragraph to summarize the article. Most of us waited until friday morning to find an article and copy the main idea from it. We didn't learn anything from it, so I took that idea and revised it to make my own that will involve a little more thinking and reasoning.

[Apatriot]

The media, most of the population, and certainly most teachers today are Liberal or Left-Hemisphere of the brain oriented, and thus opposed to anything that suggests "personal responsibility" and see those who DO NOT identify themselves with fear and negativity as threatening..... alas, they do not realize they fear the YANG energy of their own MIND realms, and delusionally see those who are not afraid as the enemy and in need of censorship.

I think you have your brain hemispheres mixed up.

The left hemisphere is the logical one. The right hemisphere is the artistic one.

(the left brain controls the right side of the body, and vice versa. Left-handed people tend to be right-brained (artistic) )

[helpingin2010]

First of all, I would like to say that there are Reps out there that are teachers....I do, however, think that bureaucracy and certain "rules" keep some teachers from being the teachers they want to be. I agree that the teachers need to be on the inside to make a difference. I will be teaching in a year and want to take my principLes inside the school and make a difference. Count me as one of the Reps going into the trenches, so to speak..I will stand and make a difference...thanks so much for the people that feel the same way that I feel.....maybe we can all come together and make a difference in this country that is being turned upside down...

[TRUTH SQUAD]

All the Reps I know tend to talk about making a change. But only do within their own business.
About 50% of the Dems I know are on committees, school boards, etc. The other half are lazy.

Who is better? It doesn't matter. The work for changing a bad system takes both working for consensus, or a livable solution.

Both have their faults, but rarely do each admit their faults, instead pointing out those of the other side.

[bitterclinger84]

what makes you think they aren't? 45% of the people in this country voted republican, i am sure some of them are teachers.

though, typically teachers in unions will vote democratic. maybe thats your answer.

I once had a girl tell me "I'm a teacher so I have to be a democrat. They're the only ones who care about teachers." :eek:

[bitterclinger84]

Just to get back on track here, because I'm not sure we've really answered the question at all yet. I guess the question should be passed on to the board members who are republicans, who are not teachers. My question for them would be, did you ever consider teaching? Why did you decide not to be a teacher? If you were told you had to become a teacher, what parts of becomming a teacher or the job itself would you like the least?

Truthfully, I gave some consideration to teaching a few years back. My decision not to do so had less to do with politics and more to do with myself. I don't have the patience to teach.

My best friend, on the other had, is a high school science teacher--and a staunch Republican. She pretty much doesn't discuss politics or religion at work unless someone else brings it up first. She chose a different union other than the NEA because she knows they donate such large amounts of money to the Democratic party. It works for her and she loves her job :)

[archangelo]

I have gradually considered myself to be more of a Conservative than a Republican. In terms of "expressing my principles," on the job, I have found that a good bit of humor goes a long way.

After 18 years teaching, my advice for the young Republican/Conservative teacher is this: be the considerate and concerned person you must be to have chosen this work. Don't forget that, in order to dare to teach, you must already possess talents and resources that most others do not have. Respect this fact about yourself, and never act in a way that denigrates the gifts you have been given and the gift that you are. Be kind and helpful; go out of your way to be there for other teachers. Have humor and humility. Along with your talents is the ego of a prima donna -- keep it in check. Then, no matter your politics, others will be much more ready to listen to you, or at least tolerate you, while liking you nonetheless.

My colleagues know exactly how I feel about many things. Many have come forward to let me know they feel the same. Others have made it clear, politely, that they see things differently. Yet we remain colleagues and even friends. I was even able to resign from the union without the repercussions one would expect! What is clear to each of us is that our beliefs have, at their core, concern for our students and ourselves, and our collective future.

I can half joke with my fellow teachers about how I think that the public school system should be hotlined for child abuse. They have heard me say that the real motivation of the liberal education system for the past 60 years has been to create a voting populace stupid enough to elect a pop star for president. But past the humorous bluster I know that I have played a part in the positive attitude that has made the faculty of my school such a success. Like no other school I know of, we are on guard against the "quick fixes," experiments in social engineering, social activism, and populist politics that soak the public school system, creating cosmetic reform, destroying human dignity, and creating non-intelligent proles. Our staff bands together to face these attacks in such an intelligent and coherent way that our victories can neither be denied nor denigrated. And, if I may say so myself, our methods and results are quite in line with what one would expect from a real "Republican" or "Conservative" agenda. I just wouldn't describe it like that to all of my colleagues! (At least not in a way that wouldn't get them to laugh.) :cool:

So, we are out here, and we are having a much greater effect than many may think, because our strategies and techniques (if you may call them that) are as right as our motivations and goals.

[bitterclinger84]

I have noticed a couple of people saying that Conservative teachers have no more of a right to interject their politics into the classroom than liberal teachers. I have no problem with this statement, but my question is, how did you get that from the OP? I don't remember anyone saying that they (as a teacher, Liberal or Conservative) try to interject their "politics" into the classroom.

[TCUFan]

Why aren't more conservatives teachers?

They're not interested in the pay cut.

TCUFan

[Sox&Patsfan]

I'd be happy being a teacher. I think no teacher has a right to give their personal beliefs in the classroom.

[RWReaganfan]

I'd be happy being a teacher. I think no teacher has a right to give their personal beliefs in the classroom.

So if I claim that 2 plus 2 equals 4 in my math class, I should not impose my beliefs on my students?

[Scot]

So many classes in schools are liberal at the core. They TEACH liberal idealogy. A lot of conservative ideology is hard lined and often taken offensively by minorities so it would be nearly impossible to teach many subjects such as History, Sociology, English, etc from a conservative point of view. Too many minorities would be up in arms, and you'd be forced to change your ideals, or hit the road.

[Greyclouds]

So many classes in schools are liberal at the core. They TEACH liberal idealogy. A lot of conservative ideology is hard lined and often taken offensively by minorities so it would be nearly impossible to teach many subjects such as History, Sociology, English, etc from a conservative point of view. Too many minorities would be up in arms, and you'd be forced to change your ideals, or hit the road.

You know what? You've hit on a point that I feel is quite compelling to investigate.

IF subjects such as Sociology, English, Philosophy and such are all predominantly "liberal" in origins, then I have a question:

Where is the Conservative culture, and how deep is it?


Is the Conservative culture composed entirely of Christian Theology? Is it derived entirely from political pundits? Is there any substance to it? Is it worth studying, or is it something that is easily picked up on?

[Scot]

You know what? You've hit on a point that I feel is quite compelling to investigate.

IF subjects such as Sociology, English, Philosophy and such are all predominantly "liberal" in origins, then I have a question:

Where is the Conservative culture, and how deep is it?


Is the Conservative culture composed entirely of Christian Theology? Is it derived entirely from political pundits? Is there any substance to it? Is it worth studying, or is it something that is easily picked up on?
I'll provide an example of my thoughts on this. Suppose you're in a Sociology class and the professor begins a lesson on how people in lower income brackets in this country remain there because their parents were lazy, stupid, and unambitious, they moved to areas where others like them congregatred, they surrounded themselves with others that behaved like they did, and they continue to neglect their parenting responsibilities, resulting in another generation worse than the predicessor.

Although there is room for some debate here, there is also a lot of truth and reality. The more harsh and true the reality, the tougher it is for people to face it. It's a lot easier to tell students that success and wealth is based on opportunty and being born into a low socio-economic group is the reason that people are discriminated against and face struggles in life.

[donesprague]

since when did it become impossible to work with people who don't share the same political views as you? seriously, you are implying that a republican going to college to be a teacher won't want to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be forced to hang out with liberals?

I think you sort of backed into the answered the original question.

Many times a republican going to college to be a teacher won't be allowed to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be rejected by liberals who control the hiring process. .

Too many liberals don't tolerate people who don’t agree with them. The original question applies to the media and entertainment as well as education. The libs control every source of thought stimulation I can think of other than talk radio and online communication. In talk radio, the program host simply states what the listeners want to hear. When they don’t say what the listeners want to hear, we tell them. The libs try to dominate online discussion with various tactics but online communication is a great equalizer that prevents typical meeting domination techniques.

[donesprague]

You know what? You've hit on a point that I feel is quite compelling to investigate.

IF subjects such as Sociology, English, Philosophy and such are all predominantly "liberal" in origins, then I have a question:

Where is the Conservative culture, and how deep is it?


Is the Conservative culture composed entirely of Christian Theology? Is it derived entirely from political pundits? Is there any substance to it? Is it worth studying, or is it something that is easily picked up on?

Conservative culture includes: individual freedom to try and either succeed or fail in any field of endeavor, individual responsibility for their actions, and some modicum of pride in their own accomplishment.

Most people are basically conservative but they are offended when you point it out to them.

Religion or race or sex doesn’t make you lean conservative or liberal. However; they might cause some to think they make a person lean one way or the other.

Most conservatives want get up in the morning, eat a breakfast of their choice, drive to work while listening to talk radio or music, earn their days pay, go home and have a beer or ice cream with supper, watch some TV, go to bed, have sex with their spouse then go to sleep. Since most people want to do what conservatives want to do, they are basically conservative.

Most liberals don’t like the idea of everyone having the breakfast of their choice. They think we aren’t capable of making the correct choices for our breakfast. Most liberals don’t want us to drive to work. They want us to ride a bicycle or ride a bus or walk to work. Most liberals don’t want us to listen to talk radio because it confirms our thought process. Most liberals don’t want us to earn a days pay. They want some of us to get paid even though we don’t earn it. They want some of the workers to give up their pay to others. Most liberals don’t want us to go home and have a beer or ice cream with supper. As before, they think they should determine our diet. Most liberals want us to only watch the liberal TV network programs but don’t want us to be able to watch other cable stations. Most liberals want to have sex with someone even if it is with their spouse or partner of the day. Most liberals do want to get some sleep. Since most people don’t want to do what liberals want to do, they aren’t liberals.

Most of the people who think they are liberal aren’t liberal but are really conservatives. We are told that conservatives are mean and liberals are nice. We are told that it is the liberals who want to help our fellow man but conservatives don’t. They don’t tell us that liberals want to hand out part of other peoples fish. Conservatives want to teach a person to fish so they can add product to the overall bucket of consumable goods for everyone. Liberals take from working productive people then skimming most off the top before giving some to the non-productive. We are told that conservatives are greedy rich but there are more liberal greedy rich in the legislative branches.

Some people who say they are conservative really aren’t. Conservatives want people to get paid for their efforts. Most conservatives don’t like to have their pay and benefits cut so the executives can get a bonus.

[Slam6389]

Republicans generally aren't smart enough.

[raelgirl]

Hey, I am a conservative Republican who is a public school teacher. Sadly, though, I am a 7th grade math teacher who doesn't have much of a chance or a platform to share my political views.

[donesprague]

Republicans generally aren't smart enough.

This is an example of what republicans have to put up with.

[donesprague]

Hey, I am a conservative Republican who is a public school teacher. Sadly, though, I am a 7th grade math teacher who doesn't have much of a chance or a platform to share my political views.

If you follow the liberal method, you don't waste all the time on the subject the class is supposed to be about because it keeps you from indoctrination and propaganda activity. However; diverting to promoting anything other than the liberal agenda will get you in trouble.

[Slam6389]

This is an example of what republicans have to put up with.
Lighten Up.

[Apatriot]

Republicans generally aren't smart enough.


Go away troll!

[Greyclouds]

I'll provide an example of my thoughts on this. Suppose you're in a Sociology class and the professor begins a lesson on how people in lower income brackets in this country remain there because their parents were lazy, stupid, and unambitious, they moved to areas where others like them congregatred, they surrounded themselves with others that behaved like they did, and they continue to neglect their parenting responsibilities, resulting in another generation worse than the predicessor.

Then that professor is only speaking about half of the situation, and is speaking in huge generalizations.

Discriminatory lending also contributed to the social "bracketing" of the lower classes and minorities. Also, hard work is not always rewarded; certain TYPES of work that you do is rewarded! For instance, the rapper that publishes one album every 1.5 years earns far more than the overworked low-level accountant who was denied a promotion for political reasons. "Think smarter, not harder," might be the better mantra in this case.


Although there is room for some debate here, there is also a lot of truth and reality. The more harsh and true the reality, the tougher it is for people to face it. It's a lot easier to tell students that success and wealth is based on opportunty and being born into a low socio-economic group is the reason that people are discriminated against and face struggles in life.

Of course; because that's a generalization that does not deal with all the minutia that are simultaneously involved in a person's living situation.

Perhaps the conservative culture is defined as being permanently antagonistic towards liberal culture?

[Greyclouds]

Conservative culture includes: individual freedom to try and either succeed or fail in any field of endeavor, individual responsibility for their actions, and some modicum of pride in their own accomplishment.

OK, but truly you are describing FREEDOM and LIBERTY. In the United States, you are free to pursue happiness; however, the repercussions of such a pursuit vary in terms of the harshness of the consequences. For instance? Drug addicts run a very significant risk of being jailed and/or starving to death/overdosing. A general Liberal ideology would offer economic means to rehabilitate drug abusers; a general conservative would not offer such means.


Most people are basically conservative but they are offended when you point it out to them.

Religion or race or sex doesn’t make you lean conservative or liberal. However; they might cause some to think they make a person lean one way or the other.

Most conservatives want get up in the morning, eat a breakfast of their choice, drive to work while listening to talk radio or music, earn their days pay, go home and have a beer or ice cream with supper, watch some TV, go to bed, have sex with their spouse then go to sleep. Since most people want to do what conservatives want to do, they are basically conservative.

Having a normal suburban-style life is not necessarily conservative or liberal. There are fiscal and social conservatives whose lives may vary significantly from your above situation. There are die-hard liberal hippies who live exactly the same style of life as you described it!

Clearly, the above lifestyle is as general as you could possibly make it, and is not indicative of one's conservative or liberal leanings.


Most liberals don’t like the idea of everyone having the breakfast of their choice. They think we aren’t capable of making the correct choices for our breakfast. Most liberals don’t want us to drive to work. They want us to ride a bicycle or ride a bus or walk to work. Most liberals don’t want us to listen to talk radio because it confirms our thought process. Most liberals don’t want us to earn a days pay. They want some of us to get paid even though we don’t earn it. They want some of the workers to give up their pay to others. Most liberals don’t want us to go home and have a beer or ice cream with supper. As before, they think they should determine our diet. Most liberals want us to only watch the liberal TV network programs but don’t want us to be able to watch other cable stations. Most liberals want to have sex with someone even if it is with their spouse or partner of the day. Most liberals do want to get some sleep. Since most people don’t want to do what liberals want to do, they aren’t liberals.

This is just as fantastical an anecdote as your prior example.

Truly, you are arguing against an AUTHORITARIAN culture! AUTHORITARIANS deign to have the federal government control BOTH social and fiscal policies of ordinary people.

My very conservative Uncle, who was a senior level manager at a hedge fund, is now being paid just to sit on the side-lines while the hedge fund is being reorganized. He does almost NO work, yet gets paid his full salary. He sends me the same sorts of anti-Obama emails as my conservative (and very poor) grandfather sends me. Is he a pocket liberal, by your definition? Is his hedge fund?


Most of the people who think they are liberal aren’t liberal but are really conservatives. We are told that conservatives are mean and liberals are nice. We are told that it is the liberals who want to help our fellow man but conservatives don’t. They don’t tell us that liberals want to hand out part of other peoples fish. Conservatives want to teach a person to fish so they can add product to the overall bucket of consumable goods for everyone. Liberals take from working productive people then skimming most off the top before giving some to the non-productive. We are told that conservatives are greedy rich but there are more liberal greedy rich in the legislative branches.

Some people who say they are conservative really aren’t. Conservatives want people to get paid for their efforts. Most conservatives don’t like to have their pay and benefits cut so the executives can get a bonus.

Is the conservative culture built upon the misrepresentation of liberalism? Or perhaps is conservative culture built upon xenophobic irrationalities derived from misinterpretations of geographic culture differences?

[donesprague]

Republicans generally aren't smart enough.

This is an example of what republicans have to put up with.

Lighten Up.

Considering your earlier post, and my coment about it, please explain your reply to my comment.

You make a typical statement from far left and I point out that is an example of what republicans have to deal with.

[Talk2Bill]

just in case i have not posted here yet... i am and i am! I work in a major city inner city high school.

[darknessesedge]

"Our Children Are Our Future" it has been said ... By Many, and that... Many Times Repeated . . .

And so, I pose this Question.... Why aren't more Republicans on the front lines, of teaching, the children, of this Land ? ? ?

Our Forefathers put a HIGH Importance on BASIC EDUCATION.

And, so Why aren't more patriotic, faithful, and, diligent Republicans on the front lines of teaching basic education to the children of this Land ? ? ?

Do they not beleive in the Govt.'s mission to ensure the basic education of it's populous ? ?

Clue Me in, Please . . .

cause the conservs who are teachers teach in private schools.
they are not welcomed in the govt run schools.

[Canoedude]

since when did it become impossible to work with people who don't share the same political views as you? seriously, you are implying that a republican going to college to be a teacher won't want to get a job as a teacher because he/she will be forced to hang out with liberals?

Having gone through this in my college career I can speak about it with a first hand perspective. In my classes (at a Liberal Arts Univ) I was, at times, the only male student and most certainly the only conservative (Republican). I became the target of ridicule,and stereotyping by my professors and some peers because I would challenge their assumptions when it came to certain "knowns" in the teaching world or simply ask why we don't hold the students and their parents more accountable rather than trying several different strategies in order to achieve results. Often, their strategies like student shadowing creates a special financial burden on school districts and doesn't necessarily result in higher achievement.

After two years of the same drag, I switched majors. I have friends who are conservative teachers but feel like they are in the "underground" because to even mention a conservative viewpoint results in ridicule, scorn and sometimes counseling by superiors.

So, is it likely there are Republican teachers? Absolutely? Will you hear them speaking out? Not likely because they have either just given up, are tired of the bias or have moved out of the profession.

[donesprague]

OK, but truly you are describing FREEDOM and LIBERTY. In the United States, you are free to pursue happiness; however, the repercussions of such a pursuit vary in terms of the harshness of the consequences. For instance? Drug addicts run a very significant risk of being jailed and/or starving to death/overdosing. A general Liberal ideology would offer economic means to rehabilitate drug abusers; a general conservative would not offer such means.

We are somewhat free to pursue happiness. The libs keep taking away more and more freedom. Using just your example, we know that since man found the herbs and plants that G-d gave us, we had been free to use them. About 75 years ago we eliminated the individuals choice. Now your liberal approach is to go further and take responsibility for failure of the individual. The country would not exist if the liberals had been in charge in the beginning. No wagon train would have crossed the country. In the past, friends and family helped their friends and relatives. It worked very well in the past while the parent government of today goes a long way to expand the problems.


Having a normal suburban-style life is not necessarily conservative or liberal. There are fiscal and social conservatives whose lives may vary significantly from your above situation. There are die-hard liberal hippies who live exactly the same style of life as you described it!

Clearly, the above lifestyle is as general as you could possibly make it, and is not indicative of one's conservative or liberal leanings.

You seem to have missed the point. I describe the conservative lifestyle that people live and how they think. Your first comment about feel good government intrusion in an individuals lifestyle is the liberal attitude that some typical conservatives hear in passing and thinks it sounds nice. That kind of conservative votes liberal but lives conservative.



This is just as fantastical an anecdote as your prior example.
It seems that we agree with my examples.


http://www.answers.com/topic/fantastical
Particularly excellent: divine, fabulous, fantastic, glorious, marvelous, sensational, splendid, superb, terrific, wonderful. Informal: dandy, dreamy, great, ripping, super, swell, tremendous. Slang: cool, groovy, hot, keen, neat, nifty.


Truly, you are arguing against an AUTHORITARIAN culture! AUTHORITARIANS deign to have the federal government control BOTH social and fiscal policies of ordinary people.

Every time the liberals attack a country they fail in the end. After so many direct military failures, they mainly attack from within. Every country that adopts the anti individual freedom approach of government control ends in despair and failure.



My very conservative Uncle, who was a senior level manager at a hedge fund, is now being paid just to sit on the side-lines while the hedge fund is being reorganized. He does almost NO work, yet gets paid his full salary. He sends me the same sorts of anti-Obama emails as my conservative (and very poor) grandfather sends me. Is he a pocket liberal, by your definition? Is his hedge fund?

My definition of hedge fund is legalized criminal activity. They sell stock they don’t own. Then they lend the money to the company. Then they squeeze the company to force it into bankruptcy. Then the lenders get the company while the stock becomes worthless. So the hedge fund doesn’t have to by the stock back which means they got paid to take all the profit from the investors and they also get the company for free. Unfortunately, too many conservatives call that a free market even though people from both parties make billions from the activity.


Is the conservative culture built upon the misrepresentation of liberalism? Or perhaps is conservative culture built upon xenophobic irrationalities derived from misinterpretations of geographic culture differences?

What a distortion or upside down view. Pseudo intellectualism is only outdone by pseudo compassion. Liberalism and socialism gave the world places like Cuba, North Korea and the failed USSR. Americans have liberated more countries and people than all the other liberators throughout history.
xenophobic = A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.
Americans wouldn’t have liberated so many countries and people if they were unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples. It’s the libs who want the US to allow tyrants to continue to subjugate and persecute people.

It is clear. There are 3 types of conservatives and 2 types of liberals. The followers, the leaders, and the thinkers.

Conservative followers go along with the greedy rich conservatives and liberals who just want power and money.

Liberal followers go along with the feel good mantra they are indoctrinated with from cradle to grave. They live a responsible life style taking responsibility for their actions. They think and live conservative but vote liberal because they trust and believe the democrat and RINO leaders.

Conservative leaders end up giving up after they have been investigated and castigated and found guilty of perjury for a disagreeing with people who changed their story or for a mistake in an investigation into nothing. Example, Libby was consistent in his recollection about the leak of the known information that the prosecutor knew who did it before he began his investigation into nothing. The reporters changed from agreeing with Libby to disagreeing with him. Another example, Newt taught a class that was pro-America and he was investigated and the investigation into the class found nothing except an error on one of the thousands of documents that the persecution demanded. Another case, Spiro was Nixon’s VP who quit because of a problem with a past income tax form. Instead of doing what the Obama appointees do, that is pay the back taxed, Spiro quit which cleared the way for the railroad to get Nixon. Another case is the Senate seat in IL that Obama was running way behind to get. The courts made an unprecedented ruling about a sealed confidential out of court settlement for the divorce of the leading candidate. Although the court didn’t have the right to release the settlement agreement, it did it anyway. The candidate wanted to end the undue private family discussion and harm so he quit the race. This is the government you promote. Courts legislate from the bench for the good of the libs.

Liberal leaders simply want control, it seems, because they resent the productivity and independence of individuals.

Conservative thinker believe that the individual is responsible for their own actions whether it leads to success or failure. Conservatives believe that friends and family work to help one another. Conservatives are a little left of libertarians because conservatives know that some limited government is necessary to protect the people so they can produce goods for their own consumption and to sell to others. Conservatives know that the government doesn’t make jobs or products but it can prevent jobs and products. Liberated free people with some profit motive make jobs and products. Excess government intrusion prevents the people from producing.

Liberal thinkers don’t exist because once a liberal begins to think, they become thinking conservatives.

[Greyclouds]

We are somewhat free to pursue happiness. The libs keep taking away more and more freedom. Using just your example, we know that since man found the herbs and plants that G-d gave us, we had been free to use them. About 75 years ago we eliminated the individuals choice. Now your liberal approach is to go further and take responsibility for failure of the individual. The country would not exist if the liberals had been in charge in the beginning. No wagon train would have crossed the country. In the past, friends and family helped their friends and relatives. It worked very well in the past while the parent government of today goes a long way to expand the problems.



You seem to have missed the point. I describe the conservative lifestyle that people live and how they think. Your first comment about feel good government intrusion in an individuals lifestyle is the liberal attitude that some typical conservatives hear in passing and thinks it sounds nice. That kind of conservative votes liberal but lives conservative.
<snip>

I think that you have this idealized version of conservatism that just does not match up in the end. You describe YOUR INDIVIDUAL reality, and then gloss it over with the term "conservative."

Even the authoritarian wants SOME private life. Does that make him conservative? Hardly. It doesn't even mean that he holds that as a conservative value.


Every time the liberals attack a country they fail in the end. After so many direct military failures, they mainly attack from within. Every country that adopts the anti individual freedom approach of government control ends in despair and failure.

"Anti-individual freedom approach" is by definition, Authoritarian, not liberal. Being pro-US Central government is not exactly Authoritarian. Why? Because our founders had the prescience to create an individual's bill of rights. So, even your conception of Liberalism is flawed by the fact that the strengthening of the federal governmen of the US, by definition, cannot erode the individual rights of the people without massive popular support. By that point? We are all Authoritarians anyways.


My definition of hedge fund is legalized criminal activity. They sell stock they don’t own. Then they lend the money to the company. Then they squeeze the company to force it into bankruptcy. Then the lenders get the company while the stock becomes worthless. So the hedge fund doesn’t have to by the stock back which means they got paid to take all the profit from the investors and they also get the company for free. Unfortunately, too many conservatives call that a free market even though people from both parties make billions from the activity.

Caveat emptor, my friend. Buyer beware. That is, by definition, a lack of regulation that ensures that personal responsibility over one's finances is achieved. Why? Because if you're not smart and prudent, you'll be scammed to poverty. Was that NOT the ideal of your original post? Personal responsibility and the consequences it entails?


What a distortion or upside down view. Pseudo intellectualism is only outdone by pseudo compassion. Liberalism and socialism gave the world places like Cuba, North Korea and the failed USSR. Americans have liberated more countries and people than all the other liberators throughout history.
xenophobic = A person unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples.
Americans wouldn’t have liberated so many countries and people if they were unduly fearful or contemptuous of that which is foreign, especially of strangers or foreign peoples. It’s the libs who want the US to allow tyrants to continue to subjugate and persecute people.

Really? What about Reagan and the Contras? What about Ford and Suharto? What about G. H. W. Bush and Saddam?

Historical precedent shows that dictatorships are favored by leaders of both political ideologies in the US. Your ideals, notwithstanding.


It is clear. There are 3 types of conservatives and 2 types of liberals. The followers, the leaders, and the thinkers.

Conservative followers go along with the greedy rich conservatives and liberals who just want power and money.

Liberal followers go along with the feel good mantra they are indoctrinated with from cradle to grave. They live a responsible life style taking responsibility for their actions. They think and live conservative but vote liberal because they trust and believe the democrat and RINO leaders.

See, here is where I disagree again:

A responsible, normal lifestyle is NOT indicative of political leanings. Nor is such a lifestyle definitively conservative. If you want that lifestyle CONTROLLED as such but economic policies to be laissez faire, then you're a conservative. If you want that lifestyle to be left up to personal choice but have REGULATIONS on economic policies, then you're a liberal. If you want NO control over both social and economic policies, you're a libertarian.

You could be sleeping with a random woman a day, and snorting coke off of a glass table and still have a libertarian type of philosophy. You might be hypocritical if you were a self-proclaimed conservative, but that's besides the point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass



Conservative leaders end up giving up after they have been investigated and castigated and found guilty of perjury for a disagreeing with people who changed their story or for a mistake in an investigation into nothing. Example, Libby was consistent in his recollection about the leak of the known information that the prosecutor knew who did it before he began his investigation into nothing. The reporters changed from agreeing with Libby to disagreeing with him. Another example, Newt taught a class that was pro-America and he was investigated and the investigation into the class found nothing except an error on one of the thousands of documents that the persecution demanded. Another case, Spiro was Nixon’s VP who quit because of a problem with a past income tax form. Instead of doing what the Obama appointees do, that is pay the back taxed, Spiro quit which cleared the way for the railroad to get Nixon. Another case is the Senate seat in IL that Obama was running way behind to get. The courts made an unprecedented ruling about a sealed confidential out of court settlement for the divorce of the leading candidate. Although the court didn’t have the right to release the settlement agreement, it did it anyway. The candidate wanted to end the undue private family discussion and harm so he quit the race. This is the government you promote. Courts legislate from the bench for the good of the libs.

Liberal leaders simply want control, it seems, because they resent the productivity and independence of individuals.

Conservative thinker believe that the individual is responsible for their own actions whether it leads to success or failure. Conservatives believe that friends and family work to help one another. Conservatives are a little left of libertarians because conservatives know that some limited government is necessary to protect the people so they can produce goods for their own consumption and to sell to others. Conservatives know that the government doesn’t make jobs or products but it can prevent jobs and products. Liberated free people with some profit motive make jobs and products. Excess government intrusion prevents the people from producing.

Liberal thinkers don’t exist because once a liberal begins to think, they become thinking conservatives.

Note the size of your "liberal" segments for the above. Does this not indicate a misunderstanding of liberal positions or at least an incomplete understanding?

[donesprague]

I think that you have this idealized version of conservatism that just does not match up in the end. You describe YOUR INDIVIDUAL reality, and then gloss it over with the term "conservative."

Even the authoritarian wants SOME private life. Does that make him conservative? Hardly. It doesn't even mean that he holds that as a conservative value.



"Anti-individual freedom approach" is by definition, Authoritarian, not liberal. Being pro-US Central government is not exactly Authoritarian. Why? Because our founders had the prescience to create an individual's bill of rights. So, even your conception of Liberalism is flawed by the fact that the strengthening of the federal governmen of the US, by definition, cannot erode the individual rights of the people without massive popular support. By that point? We are all Authoritarians anyways.



Caveat emptor, my friend. Buyer beware. That is, by definition, a lack of regulation that ensures that personal responsibility over one's finances is achieved. Why? Because if you're not smart and prudent, you'll be scammed to poverty. Was that NOT the ideal of your original post? Personal responsibility and the consequences it entails?



Really? What about Reagan and the Contras? What about Ford and Suharto? What about G. H. W. Bush and Saddam?

Historical precedent shows that dictatorships are favored by leaders of both political ideologies in the US. Your ideals, notwithstanding.



See, here is where I disagree again:

A responsible, normal lifestyle is NOT indicative of political leanings. Nor is such a lifestyle definitively conservative. If you want that lifestyle CONTROLLED as such but economic policies to be laissez faire, then you're a conservative. If you want that lifestyle to be left up to personal choice but have REGULATIONS on economic policies, then you're a liberal. If you want NO control over both social and economic policies, you're a libertarian.

You could be sleeping with a random woman a day, and snorting coke off of a glass table and still have a libertarian type of philosophy. You might be hypocritical if you were a self-proclaimed conservative, but that's besides the point.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_compass




Note the size of your "liberal" segments for the above. Does this not indicate a misunderstanding of liberal positions or at least an incomplete understanding?

True, authoritarian wants SOME private life but they don't allow others to have private lives. That makes them liberals.


We seem to agree that "Anti-individual freedom approach" is by definition, Authoritarian.

Being in favor of large central central government is liberal and that is exactly Authoritarian.

The liberals contiue to destroy the constitution and the bill of rights our founders created. Moving more control and decision to the central governmen by definition takes the rights and responbsibility from the individual. If the government makes the choice, the individual can't make the choice.


The buyer of counterfeit stock doesn't know they are buying counterfeit stock. Any basic understanding of basic common law shows that people shouldn’t be allowed to sell something that doesn’t exist or that they don’t own. Only a fool would advocate the legalization of scam artist activity. To read a prospectus and purchase stock becomes meaningless when scam artists are allowed to run amok in the name of a free market.

You make my point when you mention examples of republicans who fight liberal socialist invasion. Americans figth to liberate people while liberals fight to keep people and nations under the tyrants hands.


Historical precedent shows that dictatorships have occasionally been condoned by republicans or conservatives but they are consistently promoted and actively supported by liberals and socialists.


The way a person lives and conducts their activities is definitely indicative of their thought processes. Since a lifestyle based on self reliance and being responsible for ones actions is consistent with conservative values, it is an indication that the person is conservative. A lifestyle where the individual promotes government intrusion and restriction of individual choice is consistent with liberal socialists thinking. You can’t divorce thought process, lifestyle and political leaning.

Combining the word “CONTROLLED” and “laissez faire” is a typical liberal tactic to use extremism and contradiction to distract. I don’t know of a single conservative who doesn’t want basic social structure to exist. Some of the 10 commandments have basic social structure defined. Don’t steal, don’t murder, don’t lie about your neighbor. You are conservative if you want basic social structure with a limited central government mainly to keep foreign invaders from conquering the productive base of the working people. You are liberal if you want strong all powerful central government that makes all choices for all aspects of other peoples lives but leaves you to do as you wish while getting aid from the government if you want it. Government aid is money taken from productive people and given to others. It is like charity except charity is voluntarily while government aid is mandatory. Conservatives like charity while liberals like government aid.

If you are a liberal, you could be sleeping with a random person a day, and snorting coke off of a glass table and still want to prevent other people from simply making their own typical worldwide freedom loving conservative lifestyle decisions.

[Apatriot]

cause the conservs who are teachers teach in private schools.
they are not welcomed in the govt run schools.


Ridiculous. I'm a former public school teacher and a conservative, and I had no problem related to my political convictions in terms of getting jobs. Yes, teachers are slightly more liberal than the general population, but not by much.