Fox Changes Stance On Town Hall Protesters When Republicans Are Targeted
Fox & Friends responded to a video of Wisconsin union supporters protesting at a town hall hosted by GOP lawmakers by calling the protesters a "mob" and complaining that they weren't "civil." But Fox & Friends promoted and encouraged similar protests by opponents of health care reform at Democrats' town hall meetings in August 2009.
Please upgrade your flash player. The video for this item requires a newer version of Flash Player. If you are unable to install flash you can download a QuickTime version of the video.
Fox & Friends Calls Town Hall Labor Protesters A "Mob," Complains They Aren't "Civil"
Doocy: "These Lefty Interrupters Shut Down The Debate." On the March 9 edition of Fox News' Fox & Friends, the co-hosts responded to video of a town hall meeting held by GOP lawmakers in Wisconsin that was disrupted by labor protesters. Co-host Steve Doocy complained that "they're there to talk about things and talk about what's going on and, ultimately, these lefty interrupters shut down the debate. Actually there was no debate, they shut down all conversation." Co-host Gretchen Carlson stated: "The problem was they had been given ground rules before," but that "some people didn't follow the rules." [Fox News, Fox & Friends, 3/9/11]
Doocy: "A Mob Shuts Down A Town Hall Meeting In Wisconsin." Later on Fox & Friends, Doocy stated: "A mob shuts down a town hall meeting in Wisconsin, but the only place you're likely to see this story? On ABC? NBC? Nope. Right here on Fox & Friends." [Fox & Friends, 3/9/11]
Doocy: "Protesters Shutting Down A Town Hall Meeting In Wisconsin. Where Is The Civility?" Later on Fox & Friends, Doocy said: "Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker ready to compromise, apparently. But it seems any attempt at peace in Wisconsin goes something like this these days." After playing the video clip, Doocy asked: "Protesters shutting down a town hall meeting in Wisconsin. Where's the civility?" During the segment, an on-screen graphic claimed that protesters "don't want to talk." From Fox & Friends:
[Fox & Friends, 3/9/11]
Doocy: "Weren't We Supposed To Be More Civil? ... How Is That Working Out?" Later on Fox & Friends, after Carlson aired the video clip again, Doocy responded by asking: "Weren't we supposed to be more civil? ... How is that working out?" Doocy also claimed that "if something like that happened and those were tea party people screaming ... it would be a really big story, right?" [Fox & Friends, 3/9/11]
Fox & Friends Relentlessly Promoted And Encouraged Health Care Town Hall Protests Aimed At Democrats
Fox & Friends Host Johnson To Protesters: "[W]e Thank You For Representing Americans, And We Hope That Other Americans Get Out There." On August 4, 2009, Fox & Friends hosted two people who said they questioned former Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA) and Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius at an August 2, 2009, Philadelphia town hall event that was disrupted by protesters opposed to Democrats' health care reform plans. From Fox & Friends:
CAROL O'BRIEN: I think they were -- well, personally, I think they were very unprepared for that meeting. I think they were asked questions, and they did not have valid responses. They stayed on message. Even though part of my question -- I asked them please not to insult my intelligence by staying on message, but to give us an honest answer. They did not do that. And I think if you look at their facial expressions during the town hall meeting, you could tell that they were not happy with the response of the crowd.
PETER JOHNSON JR. (guest host): Well, O'Briens, we're all looking for honest answers, and we thank you for representing Americans, and we hope that other Americans get out there and voice their opinions. Let's check in with you as time goes on and see what kind of progress we are making. John and Carol O'Brien, thank you so much. [Fox & Friends, 8/4/09]
Carlson: "Are You Gonna Call" Your Member Of Congress "Or Are You Gonna Go To One Of These Receptions Where They're Actually There?" Introducing the August 4, 2009, segment on the Philadelphia town hall, Fox & Friends co-host Gretchen Carlson said:
CARLSON: [Y]ou probably have a lot on your mind for your respective members of Congress when they come home from recess. Are you gonna call them up and tell them how you really feel, or are you going to go to one of these receptions where they're actually there in person? That's happening now all across the country. [Fox & Friends, 8/4/09]
Johnson: "We Need To Have This Every Day Throughout August." From Peter Johnson Jr.'s discussion of the Specter-Sebelius town hall meeting the previous day on Fox & Friends:
JOHNSON: Well, they sound kind of useless, and they sound kind of, really, uninformed and not -- no. We need to have this every day throughout August. People have to be contacting their congress people, their senators. They need to bring their congress people and senator every day to account in their neighborhoods, in their congressional districts and talk about this issue and ask questions and say, "If I need to get a hip replacement, am I gonna get it? If I've got private insurance now, and I'm happy with it, am I gonna lose it? Is the government gonna decide whether I live or die at some point in the future? What is the future of my health care, one-sixth of our American budget?" [Fox & Friends, 8/3/09]
Doocy: "If You Want To Contact Your Congress Members And Sound Off, Go To FoxNation.Com." Also on August 3, 2009, during the same segment on the Philadelphia town hall, co-host Steve Doocy suggested people go to the Fox Nation for information on how to contact members of Congress:
DOOCY: That's right. So anyway, if you want to contact your congress members and sound off, go to FoxNation.com. It is a great interactive website where you can sound off, and you'll also find your lawmakers' phone numbers and email there. Hmm, very handy. [Fox & Friends, 8/3/09]
Fox On-Screen Text: "Hold Congress Accountable! Now Is The Time To Speak Your Mind." On the August 3, 2009, edition of Fox & Friends, the following on-screen graphic aired:
Her Make-up must have the wrong Chemical-Base cause it's losing its adherence.
I've been looking at pictures of Gretchen & Helen Thomas, "before & after" for Scale.
If Roger Ailes could only turn back the Clock would he still be so willing to Close the Sale?
Speak truth to power.
Mr. News
In any case, yes; republicans do this because they have absorbed a contradiction. They have inflated sense of ego and importance (manifest destiny) to the point where they cant develop cognitive dissonance, because its the default state.
That is how they can claim that everything we do is bad. But really, its their massive contradiction that gets to me. How from 1950-2008, the rightwing mocked protestors, and the media ignored us. The only ones who got attention where the clinic bombers on the right. They just completely ignored all of our huge protests.
And then the rightwing has an "incoherent, bubbling mass of violent, hate-filled vitriol oozed into a slimy muck that moves about the country without static direction or goal" sort of protest, very small ones compared to ours, and its suddenly the superpatriot thing and anyone who said anything against it was evil. Our protets continue to be mocked (even though they usually vastly outpace any rightwing ones.) Mostly because we have coherent goals.
When 30% of the populaton (or less, really, it doesnt matter) want a rightwing stance, its "the will of the people." to be rammed through no matter what, no matter WHAT. If 30% of the population wants liberal stances, its suddenly "Elections have consequences" again and it never makes it onto the table.
When 70% of the population wants a liberal stance, the rightwing claims its still subverting the will of the people.
Oh and expect them to lie constantly about everything and never go back and retract their previous lies even when they become universally obvious to be lies. Thats all the rightwing can do now: Lie because they are based solely ON lies.
It's further made irrelevant though, since teachers go to school for closer to seven years after you figure in the certification.
I also found this for a nationwide perspective:People majoring in general studies saw some of the biggest drops in compensation, said Mimi Collins, communications director for NACE. The average offer for them tumbled 17.7% to $37,356.
$49,490 Avg. Secondary Teacher
Salary 114% Teacher Salary vs. State Average
15 Vacation Weeks Per Year:
3 Years to Tenure:
Colorado provides differential pay and loan forgiveness for teachers teaching in high needs schools
In other words the need a bachelors with a minor. Not even close to a Masters Degree. I tired of hearing how teacher have masters degrees when even if they do there not required K-12. A teaching degree is a 4 year degree.
I dont see how this is underpaid. Seems about right to me.
I can see why you're angry at teachers.
Oh those greedy teachers!
You really know nothing about anything, do you?
...And yeah. Apparently no concept of reality. Must never have put any kids through public schools.
People often talk of the stress suffered by stand-up comics. A teacher has far greater stress - standing alone in front of the same audience(s) day after day and having to come up with new, fresh material each time. The audiences can get very stroppy and some of them don't even want to be there. This is not helped by the fact that the majority of teachers take their vocation seriously and actually worry about their students.
As for all those "holidays" it's amazing how many teachers use a significant part of this essential break from the stress of contact hours to revise and refine their lesson plans.
Just because you went to school doesn't mean you're an expert on education and teaching - any more than having had the flu makes you an expert in either healthcare policy or the practice of medicine.
Teachers train and educate our children to be the next leaders of our country. By the way, I am not a teacher.
I suspect that many of the attendees of the Fox approved town halls would agree with highliter and be angry if someone actually wanted to address reality with them.
Because a CEO or an attorney provides a service that someone pays for and the more profit that is made, the more mooney is available for compensation.
Think about this from a students eyes. If you're in high school or middle school, any one teacher, you may have for 1 hour per day for maybe 1 year max. Any one teacher makes up a very small part of any one student's education. 1 great teacher might inspire you to great things, but in the grand scheme of your education, that one great teacher is probably fairly insignificant. The most significant person in a child's academic success is the child himself.
On the contrary, 1 great CEO might have several thousand employees relying on their decisions and leadership for years at a time. People with retirement funds invested in a corporation rely on that CEO to guide the company to success and increased stock value. So yes, I'll say it.... a good CEO is more important than a good teacher. (Oh, and as I stated above, the CEO relies on revenue earned to pay his salary whereas a teacher gets his money from taxpayers, regardless of how good of a teacher he is.)
Please note: I have a great respect for teachers, and they do a wonderful service for society. I would like to see teachers paid according to how good they are, as opposed to just how long they've been a teacher.
Okay. Now you might make another comparison to how many children that teacher might teach a subject to or provide help to over the course of his life, and what kind of cumulative effect that has upon the society.
As to your point about pay according to how "good" they are: how is this to be determined? Test scores are a ridiculous approach. No teacher who teaches in a school in a poor area would have a chance in h&ll of "competing" with a teacher in a more affluent school. There are Savage Inequities which make comparing teachers almost impossible.
Obviously, in some instances a teacher might get behind a troubled kid and turn his life around.
A good CEO affects people monetarily, true. A good CEO can expand a company and create jobs and higher salaries, and bonuses. A bad CEO can cost people their jobs.
In general, are CEO's more important that teachers? Probably not. But for many people, their lives are more directly affected by the CEO of the company they work for than any one teacher they ever had.
An back to the point of compensation: How many people are qualified to be a teacher, and how many are qualified to be a quality CEO? The CEO probably has more schooling in general - though it may be equal in many cases. But a CEO becomes a CEO by continually being the best at his job and moving up through the ranks - earning each step up along the way. Each new position requires a new set of skills. One great teacher might teach high school math for 30 years. I also continually see posts about how many hours teachers work. Great. But CEO's don't generally work 9-5. 70 to 80 hour work weeks are normal. And to one of my original points, CEOs work for companies that earn money by selling something or providing a service. You have to satisfy your customers. The better you are at that, the more money the company makes which is then given to the CEO and employees in the form of high salaries and bonuses.
I'm not trying to put down teachers. But a good CEO very often, is worth much more than a good teacher and should be paid as such.
I think most CEOs are looking to expand their fortunes and are not too concerned with the salaries of the people who actually do the work in the company. That's why we have such a huge gap in income and wealth inequality in this country.
I'm not sure why you think that. A CEO is only as good as the men and women behind him.
Let's talk about Great CEOs like Stephen Hilbert of Conseco (CNO, news, msgs), for example, took home an estimated $72 million even though the value of the company's stock during his tenure sank from $57 to $5 a share and the company ultimately ended up bankrupt.
What do you think his compensation should be Jeffy?
There are many great teachers, many average ones, and many poor ones. A CEO starts at some level, gets promotion after promotion in one company or by moving to different ones and, in most cases, earns his way up. Even a poor CEO did something right during his career. A teacher gets a job teaching and if he manages to stay at that job for the first couple of years, will then continually get raises year after year regardless of how good he is at his job.
You bring up Stephen Hilbert because he was a bad CEO on lost his company millions upon millions of dollars. What she he be paid? Nothing, he should be fired, and some board members who decided to hire him probably need to be removed as well. Way to go, you can bring up an example of a bad CEO. I'm sure there are many many more. What's your point? There are countless examples of bad teachers. Do I need to go find the name of every teacher found having sex with a student, or possessing child porn? I had a health/drivers ed teacher in high school that would give each kid a book and tell them to read each chapter and come take the test when ready. It was muliple choice. If you didn't pass, you had to read again and retake. He didn't "teach" anybody anything.
The point is, teachers don't deserve to make as much as the CEO of a million dollar company. But if a teacher could make millons for his school, then by all means, pay him a fat salary. Otherwise, treat them well with decent pay and benefits. After all, if he's a teacher, he knew up front that the pay wasn't fantastic, and if money was important, he should have tried to be a CEO instead.
In the real world, a CEO has to compensate his people based on what they are worth. If he overpays and spends too much on labor, his competition will put him out of business and then those people will have no jobs.
If you don't believe me, take a look at the American auto industry.
Actually, it seems like you don't think. A CEO has to increase the value of the organization he/she leads. If they fail in this one thing, they won't last long. In regards to compensation, CEOs are interested in the compensation of all employees. They know that they have to pay enough to attract the talent level that is required to do the work, but not over pay so that their product or service is uncompetitive.
To a certain extent, I agree. But who is responsible for picking those people? Who is responsible for the hiring practices.
To look at this another way, our education system is only as good as the teachers who teach. Based upon the way our test scores are going, these folks ain't that good.
Test scores should play a role to some extent. Peer reviews, student reviews, parent reviews could all be factors. The amount of time spent working with students outside of normal class hours. It seems like there are many factors.
I have 4 kids, and often times I could tell just from conferences and emails which teachers were good and which were just phoning it in.
I guess that means all teachers make are great, we just don't know how great they are.
But we live in reality - some of us do anyway. CEOs and business people can make tons of money because people buy their products or pay for their services. Those customers have choices with what they do with their money. Better CEOs run better companies and make more money. Recognizing this, has nothing to do with not respecting teachers.
But what those poor and starving people are going to get with liberal policies, is even less affordable energy and skyrocketing food prices. Oh... but capitalism is bad. Environmentalism is going to kill more people than capitalism (which has killed far less than socialism or communism have).
Maybe, but on that premise, if you tax people more and more and they are greedy, like you assume, they're not going to give up their lifestyle. They'll just give themselves a pay raise to offset the additional taxes and to avoid the appearance of being greedy, he'll just wait for an employee to quit and then decide not to hire a replacement and let the existing staff assume that employees duties.
Taxes are an expense on businesses. If you increase an expense, you have to decrease another one to offset it. Those cuts usually come at the expense of those lower on the totum pole.
PS After the Bush tax cuts, tax revenues increased in 04, 05, 06 and 07. It was not until the recession hit that revenues decreased and the recession was cause by many things, one of which was NOT tax cuts for the rich.
Those particular CEOs should be fired and jailed if they committed crimes. Those companies should not have been bailed out - they should have collapsed.
Don't mistake a general feeling that CEOs should earn what their board members decide to pay them, with a feeling of "all CEOs are worth millions."
BTW, Government employees are tax payers too!
Sorry, that wildly inflated rant was fun and I couldn't stop.
Anyway, perhaps this is what divides us: when you hear "I'm a CEO," you're filled with admiration. When I hear "I'm a CEO," I'm filled with feelings of distrust and loathing, based largely on the fact that, to become a "successful" CEO, one must be willing to lie, cheat and steal, and be an aggressive, petulant, self-important baby to boot. And be a complete ASS, too!
Apparently they have gone through "more and harder schooling" than you. No one said it required a masters, what I said is that to be a teacher in Oregon it requires a fifth year of education. That fifth year is 9 credits or three courses short of a masters. Most teachers here in Oregon go on to get their masters. You might try a remedial reading class to go along with one in English as well.
He calls up the lawyer.
"Sir, according to our research you haven't made a contribution to the United Way, would you like to do so?"
The lawyer responds, "A contribution? Does your research show that I have an invalid mother who requires expensive surgery once a year just to stay alive?"
The worker is feeling a bit embarrassed and says, "Well, no sir, I'm..."
"Does your research show that my sister's husband was killed in a car accident? She has three kids and no means of support!"
The worker is feeling quite embarrassed at this point. "I'm terribly sorry..."
"Does your research show that my brother broke his neck on the job and now requires a full time nurse to have any kind of normal life?"
The worker is completely humiliated at this point. "I am sorry sir, please forgive me..."
"The gall of you people! I don't give them anything, so why should I give it to you!"
What does that say about us?
It never ceases to amaze me, how you right wingers will ask "how high" when your media cult leaders command you to jump.
Highlighter, along with millions of conservative media followers have a sudden, newfound hatred for teachers.
I find it highly unlikely that this sudden hate and animosity toward our educators is a mere coincidence.
And no 21 year-olds teach. Remember, it's a five-year program. Small difference, but I still felt a correction was in order. Add a master's requirement to it, which is common, and it's a seven year program.
Also, teachers put in a lot of hours, too. How do you think the papers get graded?
So perhaps a more appropriate question to ask is, "how can a person with a master's degree work ten to twelve hour days and only be paid 35k?!?"
Next time, ask your teacher friends to help you write your posts.
Then they are the exception, and they are the problem.
But then, I find it hard to believe you have friends.
I'd be willing to be that you aren't as disrespectful to their faces as you are behind their backs because that's surely the way you operate.
How would unionizing help THE BUSNIESS OWNER!!
For police and firefighters, unions ensure that these first responders are not overworked, under-equipped, and trained to do their jobs properly and safely.
Teachers unions ensure that class sizes are manageable. They provide teachers with an outlet for complaints about ineffective or abusive administrators. They ensure teachers with experience are not fired on a whim or a misguided cost-cutting move. And in some areas, they manage the health benefit plan for the teachers, support staff and others--at a cost 1/3 that of large insurance companies.
Next question?
I. President Obama Has Already Signed Into Law Eight Separate Small Business Tax Cuts: In the Recovery Act and subsequent legislation in 2009 and 2010, the President signed the following eight small business tax cuts into law:
Maybe part of your problem is the Republicans holding this up:
1.A New Small Business Health Care Tax Credit
2.A New Tax Credit for Hiring Unemployed Workers
3.Bonus Depreciation Tax Incentives to Support New Investment
4.75% Exclusion of Small Business Capital Gains
5.Expansion of Limits on Small Business Expensing
6.Five-Year Carryback of Net Operating Losses
7.Reduction of the Built-In Gains Holding Period for Small Businesses from 10 to 7 Years to Allow Small Business Greater Flexibility in Their Investments
8.Temporary Small Business Estimated Tax Payment Relief to Allow Small Businesses to Keep Needed Cash on Hand
II. The President Intends to Sign a Small Business Jobs Bill With Another Eight Tax Cuts Benefitting Millions of Small Businesses: For weeks, Republicans have been stalling progress of a Small Business Jobs Bill that would provide additional tax relief for millions of small businesses, including the following eight tax cuts:
1.Zero Capital Gains Taxes on Key Investments in Small Businesses:
2.The Highest Small Business Expensing Limit Ever– Up to $500,000
3.An Extension of 50% Bonus Depreciation
4.A New Deduction for Health Care Expenses for the Self-Employed
5.ax Relief and Simplification for Cell Phone Deductions
6.An Increase in The Deduction for Entrepreneurs’ Start-Up Expenses
7.A Five-Year Carryback Of General Business Credits
8.Limitations on Penalties for Errors in Tax Reporting That Disproportionately Affect Small Business
III. President Obama is Proposing Tax Cuts for Millions of Real Small Businesses, While Republicans Are Using Pretext of Helping Small Business to Fight for An Average of $100,000 in Tax Cuts for Those with Incomes Over $1 Million
•The President’s Eight New Small Business Tax Cuts Would Directly Help Millions of Real Small Businesses:
◦Make 4.5 million small businesses and individuals eligible to increase the amount of investments they can write off
◦Extend bonus depreciation for 2 million businesses, small and large
◦Make investments in 1 million small businesses eligible for zero capital gains taxes
◦Allow 2 million self-employed to receive a deduction for health insurance costs on self-employment taxes
◦Enable virtually all small business owners to more easily receive a deduction for their use of cell phones
•While Republicans Claim that Their Push for High Income Tax Relief is Motivated by Concern for Small Business, 84% of the Tax Relief Goes to Those Making Over $1 Million: Republicans are holding middle class tax cuts hostage to borrow $700 billion to pay for tax cuts for the wealthiest 2% of earners. While they claim this effort is would help entrepreneurs and small businesses, according to the Joint Committee on Taxation, 84% of the tax relief would go to taxpayers with incomes of over $1 million.
You can read more here but it seems your Republican friends don't give a darn about you since you aren't a millionaire.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2010/09/10/fact-sheet-president-obama-has-signed-eight-small-business-tax-cuts-law-
7.A Five-Year Carryback Of General Business Credits: The bill would allow certain small businesses to “carry back” their general business credits to offset five years of taxes – providing them with an instant tax break – while also allowing these credits to offset the Alternative Minimum Tax, reducing taxes for these small businesses.
No one was against the 911 bill the only argument was over how to fund it.
No one ever said 35k was living the good life. It however is not bad for a 21-22 year old fresh out of college. Throw in an excellent benefits package and 15 weeks of vacation a year its actually dam good.
The state I live in ranks 17th in teacher comfort as gotten a 25% raise over the last 10 years and has no CBA. Wisconsin ranks 28th in comfort and has had only a 21% raise over the last 10 years and ranks 49 in teacher starting pay. Nice Job Unions!
And you're still unable to keep your lies straight from one sentence to the next. I stand behind my post.
The tax breaks Obama passed helped everyone making under $250,000/yr. So they did help you, no matter how much you want to stupidly pretend otherwise.
Was she an art history major at the local state college extension? Does she run a card shop? Or was she an electrical engineering major and she now works as a consultant?
If it's a retail shop, and she's the sole employee, than working 10 hour days is mandatory.
Simply having a degree doesn't mean squat. It's how you apply that degree. Teachers get a degree in education (duh!) and usually have a minor (or a least a concentration) in their subject matter.
Or it could be that your wife says she's working 70 hours a week because she is just a bad business person, a procrastinator, or she's having an affair.
How is that not a personal attack.
You seem to think that works when you do it, I thought I'd give it a try.
I already explained this to you, dumba**.
I own a business, granted sometimes i work 60 hours a week, sometimes I work 30 hours a week, sometimes I play golf. I have no degree and earn 4 times what a teacher earns.
Your wife is either in the wrong business or isn't real clever.
First, it's not BAD. It's GOOD that a professional in a tough and competitive field with an important job, and in my state closer to seven years of schooling, can make a decent living. It's GOOD that teachers are paid enough to make the position competitive and allow them to finance homes and pay off their student loans.
People in Wisconsin and around the country are coming together to fight for the right to maintain a good life for themselves and their families. Do you believe teachers should be paid just enough to survive? What kind of people would the teaching profession draw if the pay was just above poverty levels?
Second, in my early twenties, I had a two year degree, and I made roughly 35k a year, and that was about a decade ago. Thirty five thousand a year is a nice comfortable living for someone starting out, but without going into massive debt, you won't be living the high life and driving around fancy European sports cars.
Why do you begrudge people who work hard at a tough job a modest and comfortable living? Examine your comments more closely. You sound like the right wing think tank people who actually want to destroy the middle class. Is that really what you want?
But that doesn't mean we think public employees should be able to bargain collectively; especially when it involves bargaining with people appointed by politicians that were elected with the support of funds and advertising supplied by the teachers' unions.
It was President Obama that said, "Elections have consequences." True; and it is disgusting to see the dems in Wisconsin fleeing the state to avoid a vote that they won't win. And to be honest, the teachers in Wisonsin seem to be doing alright. $50,000 per year on average (meaning many make much more since the starting salary is near $25) plus benefits is a pretty good deal. It might not go that far if you live in CA or even CO, but I imagine the cost of living in Wisconsin is pretty cheap.
I read a stat that the average class size there is only 14.7 students. Seems like if they really wanted to save money, they could fire 25% of the teachers and only have 20 kids per class. The teachers there should be happy that Walker is taking this approach as opposed to just firing tons of teachers.
Let's get behind the Governor and campaign for 20 students per class across the state, across the country. We'll save money, right? You with me?
And yet, based on your earlier posts, you still think a CEO is "worth" more than a teacher.
Somehow I think a teacher making $50,000 a year is worth a lot more than a CEO making $1.5 million a year. Most CEO's could be replaced tomorrow and the company itself wouldn't even notice.
The average class size in Wisconsin is between 23 and 24 and was legally mandated until this year. (look it up)
Don't worry, I'm sure Walker doesn't have any issue with firing teacher or garbage workers or who ever. Heck, he can fire them all and make everyone home school, especially since it is so much better.
You're incorrect: average class size in the United States is about 24. Student/teacher ratio is about 15, but that includes principals and other administrators who do not teach classes.
The scary thing is, that number has been increasing over the last few years after a couple decades of decreasing.
The school year goes at least through mid-June, depending on snow-days and other unscheduled school closings.
That's 10 months.
And let's dispel another myth:
Plus teachers start their days at 7:00 a.m., classes end at 3:00. Then there are after school programs, department meetings, grading papers, lesson planning, mandatory training, security training, etc. Let's not forget formal and informal parent meetings.
An average full time teacher will spend 50 hours per week on school business, without overtime.
So for 180 teaching days, at 10 hours a day, that's 1,800 hours annually. That's also not including hours spent by teachers who coach, direct school plays, teach chorus, chaperone field trips,etc.
The average corporate employee works about 230 days per year. (52 weeks, minus 20 days vacation, minus 10 holidays, unless you're GW Bush, when you take 25% of your time on vacations clearing brush.) At eight hours a day, that's 1,840 hours per year.
Teacher works 1,800 per year. White collar worker works 1,840 per year. 52% of teachers have Masters degrees or higher, versus just 18% in the rest of the workforce.
So a teacher gets just one more "week" of vacation each year than average workers when you look at total hours worked.
Plus, there are other things teachers deal with on a daily basis that other professionals don't have to handle.
So tell me again how teachers are overpaid?
What most of the knee-jerk right wingers also don't know, is that the goal here is to destroy public education so their wealthy friends can replace it with a for profit school system that will not operate at a lower cost, reduce no burden on the taxpayer, nor improve the quality of education. They will however, seek to lower the wages of teachers and give the executive officers giant salaries.
Who needs dedicated individuals drawn to an important vocation? There are big profits to be made for a small group of already wealthy individuals who have no real concern over the education of America's children. They'll still send their own kids to expensive private academies where they can remain safely insulated from the poor and working class families.
That means that someone created the comment using some other word processing software, and then pasted it into MMFA's comment box.
"Teachers who coach get paid more..."
Yes, we forgot the $3k stipend for the extra 350 hours in season, plus the off-season work, summer ball, etc. You add it all up and they put in an extra 1000 hours for 3000 bucks. Wow, that is lucrative, $3 per hour for that coaching gig. That will bump them to the $250k tax bracket.
hiliter, you are a genius, you caught us! Good job!
Why does it anger you that teachers MIGHT make a decent salary?
That excludes state holidays as well as Christmas and Spring Breaks. Typically here in the Mid-Atlantic, school schedules also work in 3 additional days to compensate for snow days.
Only the state Department of Education can provide an exemption, and they will for extremely bad weather (like last year's monster snowstorms) or other events (like Three Mile Island when I was growing up).
It is true they get 5 (or more) days of vacation, but they also have "in-service" days about every 2 months, when they do through training without students in the classroom, and those days do NOT count against the 180 day minimum.
Coaches do get paid more, but in my school district and neighboring districts--some of the wealthiest and highest-ranked in the country--a public school teacher who works as an assitant coach only gets about $2,000-$3,000 for the season. Take a standard high school football schedule: 10 games, 5 2-hour practices (minimum) and a game each week, plus three weeks preseason. That comes out to (roughly) $18/hour. And that's just counting practice time and games, not planning, travel, playoffs, etc.
Head coaches at some public and private schools can make as much as $100,000 per year (combined teaching and coaching salaries), particularly in football-crazy states like Texas and Alabama. (That tells you how screwy some people's priorities are. Maybe we should just ban football from public schools in Wisconsin, huh?)
Don't believe me? Do the math yourself. Get a calendar and count the weekdays between August 20 and June 15. Take out your holidays and weekends. What do you come up with? About 180 days.
Here's a clue: think before you preach.
54 hours/week*4 weeks/month*10 months/year = 2160 hours/year. Last time I checked that is full time. Her salary is $32,000/year so she makes $14.81 an hour. She has two masters degrees. You sir, are an idiot.
They'll take the most extreme cases with the highest paid positions in the highest paid counties in America (without adjusting for cost of living differences), and play a numbers game to throw in maximum possible benefits without deductibles and as though every teacher falls into the highest risk category, and then tell you this is typical.
I just wish the right wing frauds would come out and tell us why they really want to stir up public resentment toward teachers.
The right wing wants to destroy unions. Look at the major outside fiscal, logistical support for each party:
Republicans: Americans for Prosperity, America . . . bunch of hidden corporate/billionaire money front groups.
Democrats: Unions (fiscal), Voter Registration Groups
When Republicans achieve power, their primary goal is to destroy, by any means legal or not, the support system of the Democratic Party. ALL OTHER GOALS ARE A EXTREMELY DISTANT SECONDARY!
Look at the actions of Tom Delay in Texas. He illegally diverted mass amounts of corporate money to districts in Texas to insure Republicans were in position to control redistricting the state. His goal was a Republican super-majority forever.
Oh boo ho your niece doesn’t get all summer off. What a shame. I joined the National Guard to get my Student loads repaid. Been deployed twice!! So you’ll excuse me if I don’t cry over your niece having to work a summer job!
LOL teaching stress don’t make me laugh!
12 Seriously Stressful Jobs
1. Combat Soldier
2. Air Traffic Controller
3. Firefighter
4. Coal Miner
5. Teacher
5. Teacher
5. Teacher
http://www.mainstreet.com/article/career/work/life-balance/12-stressful-jobs-avoid?page=1
Heres from career builders:
According to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, occupational stress originates from a variety of issues, including:
· Long hours with few or no breaks
· Employees unable to participate in the decision-making process.
· Job insecurity and large amounts of impending change
· Physical danger
Some jobs have more stress than others. That's not to say they're bad jobs, they just require people who are strong enough to handle the increased stress that comes their way. Here are eight of them:
Teachers came in 4th on their list.
http://www.careerbuilder.com/Article/CB-1005-Job-Search-8-High-Stress-Jobs/?ArticleID=1005&cbRecursionCnt=1&cbsid=1f8f6bdc16d54b4aa1f3948232f44ab7-326992824-RP-4&ns_siteid=ns_us_g_stressful_jobs
So you see teachers do have stressful jobs and guess what many have defended thier country on the battlefield and are now supporting it in the class room.
no
· Employees unable to participate in the decision-making process.
no
· Job insecurity and large amounts of impending change
no
· Physical danger
very little
Long Hours: Teachers don't get bathroom breaks in the middle of classes; they've got to get to faculty restrooms during the 4 minutes between classes, wherever they are in the building. Plus, they typically split monitoring lunch periods, which means they get about 20 minutes to eat.
Decision Making: Policies are handed down to teachers from administrators, who get these from the state, who get these from the feds. The only thing teachers can attempt to control is their classrooms, and even then, they have administrators breathing down their necks.
Job Insecurity: In the past 30 days, teachers in Providence, RI; Oakland, CA; Simi Valley, CA; and (of course) the entire state of Wisconsin received layoff notices. And that's just the first page of listing on Google when searching "teachers receive layoff notices." There are 1,870 listings in the news in the last 30 days.
Additionally, teachers can be dismissed for any accusation from a student. This is one case of guilty until proven innocent, but once accused, it is nearly impossible to get another job, even if they are completely exonerated.
Physical Danger: I live in an affluent, suburban county with a school district servicing about 50,000 students. So far this year, there have been more than 40 incidents of students bring weapons to school.
There are fistfights daily, where teachers are responsible for breaking them up. (In this area, a teacher died of a heart attack about five years ago while breaking up a fight.) Teachers are routinely threatened by students--and event their parents.
And again, this is an affluent suburban school district typically nationally rated as one of the top 25 in the nation. Imagine the conditions in an inner city school.
An acquaintance of mine, a retired Marine colonel who now teaches high school history, told me that his biggest adjustment came his first day teaching, when he told a student to be quiet and the student responded, "F*** you. Make me." Marines would follow his orders to the letter, but a 15-year-old could defy him and he couldn't do a damned thing about it.
Do you even KNOW a teacher? I'd suggest you talk to one before you continue to talk out of your bung.
Same place they got the idea that Obama raised taxes by lowering them.
Same place they went to get the poll numbers reversed on their poll graphic.
PsychGrad, I can only deduce that in all these cases, they produced the numbers from betwixt their nether regions.
people protest at something democrats do, they're heroes/patriots/brave for speaking up.
ahh...delicious bias and hypocrisy, only from Fox News.
Have you not seen how the Tea Party is portrayed? Did you see anyone in the media covering all the anti-Bush rallies jam packed with posters of Bush with Hitler mustaches, Nazi references, etc. The Tea Party rallies are extremely tame compared to almost all left-wing rallies but the media acts as if the Tea Party is responsible for all the hatred and violence in this country despite the fact that it is completely untrue.
Hypocrisy yes, but not from the right.
Oh gosh, not another Tea Party apologist. They carried guns to rallies; they used as bad, if not worse, imagery on their signs than any found at an anti-war, anti-Bush rally; they were bused into rallies from out of district to shout down the locals and interfere in town hall meetings. Now that the union people are standing up for their rights it suddenly isn't American to protest.
I will echo the same sentiment as others on this board.
People who use disruption to interfere in our democratic process are in the wrong.
Faux News is hypocritical to call the TP "patriotic" for the same actions that they are calling union members "uncivil" and a "mob".
You dems were screaming bloody murder about the health care town halls but now shutting down republican town halls is ok.
Using a filibuster to prevent an unpopular law from being passes is wrong and should be eliminated.
Running to another state to avoid a vote on a unpopular law is How democracy works.
Democrats are just fighting fire with fire. It may be distasteful, but not nearly as distasteful as a permanent Troglodyte Majority.
They don't know what the MMfA mission statement says.
They don't care about facts or anything anyone here posts just like the little Right Wing Authoritarians that they are.
They don't know what the MMfA mission statement says.
They don't care about facts or anything anyone here posts just like the little Right Wing Authoritarians that they are.
You know what, those tea party town hall interruptions and disruptions already happened, the conservative side got "their way". Now that the liberal democratic side wants to do something similar, it's time to "change the tone".
Quite frankly, I'm a little tired of being expected to adhere to more stringent rules. We liberals are always the ones who have to show restraint, never the conservatives. I'm tired of this pattern. Conservatives do it and get away with it, but then when liberals want to do it, it's no no no!
It's like the two major political philosophies are siblings, and the conservative one can get away with anything, but if the liberal one even thinks about emulating the conservative's behavior, suddenly it's time to start condemning it.
It's getting tiresome, always having to behave better and still being put under heavier suspicion and scrutiny.
Fox Changes Stance On Town Hall Protesters When Republicans Are Targeted
Nice try at changing the subject.
However, when one studies the situations, one realizes that while they seem similar on the surface, they are, in fact different in that one protest movement was wholly manufactured and played off as grassroots, while the other was wholly grassroots and is trying to passed off as manufactured.
There was no populist anger over health care reform until the health insurance lobby paid people to be angry.
On a side note, it's not a double standard, but for a peculiar reason. If both sides use tactics to deny a vote that literal prevent the vote from being possible but get upset when the other side does it, it's not a double standard, it's the standard (though a sad one).
But Fox News is saying that it's okay for one group to do it, but not for another group to do it. That's the topic that you should be discussing, but are studiously avoiding. The hypocrisy is the topic here, not whether or not these types of protests are justifiable or wise.
Yeah, thought so.
They are hypocrites for being media critics who correctly pointed out that FNC coverage has a side in this issue? How?
And you need to learn to live with your labels.
I'm trying to get you to admit your own wildly false equivalence, as opposed to berating you for submitting one.
So if you have some factual explanation that specifically points out how MMfA does exactly what FNC has done here, now would be the time to unleash it.
- MMfA: Openly exists to critique and spotlight media misinformation that favors the right, hasn't pushed or advertised or celebrated protests against GOP-led town halls.
- FNC: Purportedly a news outlet, they pushed, advertised and celebrated protests against DNC-led town halls.
But yeah, other than that, they are TOTALLY alike hypocrites doing the same thing!
MMfA; Highlighted Tea Party protests in a negative disruptive manner. Highlight Wisconsin protests as perfectly reasonable.
If that isn't plain enough for ya, forget it.
MMFA Highlight Wisconsin protests as perfectly reasonable.
Please, show.
RightON2 RWA score = 139+
And the false equivalency / logical fallacy champion is . . .
Not a trace of irony, huh?
See, this is that pattern of having to behave better, and not getting the same consideration and latitude as conservatives.
So it's hypocritical to support a democratic cause if they behave the same way as conservatives, but it's not hypocritical to condemn the democratic side after praising the conservative side for doing the same thing.
So it's just a double standard that favors the conservatives, and we liberals will have to suck it up and live with it?
It's only OK if you are republican, huh?
It's weak. That is not the topic. The topic is that the right wing media are now explicitly condemning what they had enthusiastically endorsed not so long ago.
Whether you think it's right or wrong, or whether I think it's right or wrong for the tea party, or for the union members to disrupt town halls is NOT THE ISSUE.
Again, the issue is exposing Fox News rank hypocrisy.
Same argument as yours.
And when that happens, the spineless cowards on the right can't take it. The modern GOP is like a gang of thieves who calls the police when their victims fight back.
* Highest RWA score among posters here,
* The false equivalency / logical fallacy champion,
* Totally incapable of factual support.
No one opposed people speaking out at town halls. The opposition was against the outright lies and slander.
We take your avoidance of marco21's specific points as concession.
Nah - ro just happensd to cling to the idea that there are death panels in the government take over of healthcare.
: /
You're on your game today, buddy.
"But Oscar Meyer has a way of f--king with your DNA..."
I think I see where Fox is coming from, it's only okay to disrupt town hall meetings if you do it over fake fear mongering, and not over legitimate grievances.
MMFA was criticizing faux for being hypocritical in their criticism of the protestors. Do you deny that faux supported the tea partiers in 2009 and criticized the current protestors?
This is a clear example.
You make claims and charges without providing any evidence. Explain and illustrate where MMFA does what you claim. I see them illustrating how faux is hypocritical in their criticism of the protestors in Wisconsin. Again, MMFA's outrage is directed at the hypocrisy Are you claiming faux did not praise the tea partiers and condemn the union workers in Wisconsin?
I would say the burden of proof is on you to find instances where MMFA is denouncing one group of protesters, while praising another. Overwhelmingly the Message from the right on health care was what was so disgusting.
And I'm not talking about one random poster. I'm talking about articles.
I, for one think that in all cases it's counter-productive.
Yes, they are partisan, they do not hide the fact that they are left leaning. That does not make their underlying theme incorrect. Their sole purpose is to illustrate where the right distorts, lies and misinforms. They have done that very well. Show me where they are incorrect. Are you claiming that faux did not cover the tea party protests differently than the union protestors in Wisconsin?
"They selectively put out pieces of media reporting with only conservatives as the bad guys, aka their mission statement." Since you are unable to see where you are in error, let us try this, show me where a left leaning media, i.e. MSNBC lied, distorted or misinformed.
If you can't see it, I tried.
Give us an example! They did not defend the union protestors, they criticized the hypocrisy. Darn, you are void of intellect.
If that is your position, then you are either incredibly disingenuous, or a liar. Frankly, I don't really care.
Yes, that is exactly what I am telling you. Show me where I am wrong.
Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy,
Give one example. You say they exist, but will not produce one.
You, one minute later > "I am sdure the majority of people at MMFA support them"
And you call me a mess?
Fine, use whichever term you choose, support or defend. It makes no difference.
Liberal word games are fun though.
"If you support them, you should defend them. If you defend them, you support them."
By this statement alone, you have proved that you do not know anything about the words you use, and you have no concept of logic whatsoever.
Let's take the first sentence..."If you support them, you should defend them..." While in many cases I would agree with this, I cannot say that I would in all. I may agree with someone's political or moral stance, but I would not necessarily defend the methods they use.
For example, I might believe in someone who espouses my beliefs, but once they turn to violence, I would not defend this person. This is something that the extreme right ignores consistently, especially on the topic of abortion. It's alright to support someone who is anti-choice, but once they start killing people, you should not defend them under any circumstances - but the right-wing does this all the time.
As for the second sentence..."If you defend them, you support them." This is most patently stupid. I defend the right for you and your ilk to say the most outrageous, stupid, idiotic, insensitive, and patently false things; but in no way do I support any of you.
And I assume you would say the same about us.
So you see, you have been proved an incompetent thinker solely by your idiotic statement claiming that to support and to defend are they same thing. They are not, and will never be, however you wish to say so to twist the truth.
Too bad. If you can't take the self reflection, don't respond to me.
Man, you are dense. It isnt about the actions of the union protestors it was about the hypocrisy. Do you not get that?
Hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy, hypocrisy,
Tommy NEVER understands someone else argument when he chooses not to. He is a confirmed contrarian who will argue that it only your OPINION that the sky is blue, and that it is not his fault that you can't understand that, because he has TRIED and TRIED to explain it to you, but you're just too busy parsing words like all liberals always do, because THAT'S where the REAL hypocrisy is going on, and you're just too blindly partisan to see it, so he can't help you, and on and on and on.
He's hauling out this same song and dance routine for years here under various guises, but it never varies one iota.
You'll be staring at handfuls of your own hair long before Tommy... or Right ON... or whatever moniker he's using for the moment... gets the point.
Right Wing Authoritarians like Tommy NEVER GET THE POINT. They don't think logically - GET IT STRAIGHT! They commit logical fallacies in practically ALL their arguments and don't understand why everyone doesn't agree with them. HE ALWAYS JUST TRIES TO DIVERT THE TOPIC and often succeeds at the diversion.
Give up on this Troll!
Are you daft? The article was about the hypocrisy of faux praising the tea party protestors and criticizing the union protestors. The only way you can be "correct" is by changing the discussion. MMFA's purpose is to illustrate situations where the right wing media lies, distorts or misinforms and in this case, they were right on the money. MMFA was not outraged by the tea party protestors, but by the coverage and promoting faux gave them. right ON, you change the topic instead of defending a positon that is relevant to the discussion.
But maybe I'm giving him too much credit. Stupid vs. liar, the age-old conundrum.
I didn't realize I ran a supposedly legitimate major cable news operation that licensed the public airwaves and used that license to influence opinion and make millions of dollars in advertising.
Shouldn't I have a bigger house and nicer car? What's going on around here!
This shows either poor reasoning ability or someone just working on the clock until their shift is over.
Your continual pretense of missing the point isn't helping you. Stop trying.
No, you don't.
Also the 10th person on this thread that doesn't own and operate a major cable news outlet. Go figure.
I guess you don't believe there should be any standards in news broadcasting. Lowest common denominator and race to the bottom then?
What is the "it"? That MMFA is left leaning, yes they are left leaning, so? Being left does not invalidate your argument. Youa re daft!
I thought I have said that about 10 times already.
If a photographers claims to shoot in both black and white and in color, but shoots only in color, and continually attacks black and white photographs, we say that person is not being honest in their statements.
How anyone can then say that both photographers are equally dishonest because they only shoot in one format is strange.
Otherwise your analogy is worthless.
"But highliter's point is a good one. You can't say it's ok now..while being all up in arms about it when was it the other side doing it."--right ON2
Please show the support for shutting down the Republican town hall.
"I never said MMfA pushed for anything."--right ON2
Okay, they didn't support shutting down the Republican town hall.
"Just because I agreed with highliter's point doesn't mean I think Fox isn't also guilty of the hypocrisy."--right ON2
Wait, MMFA is guilty of hypocrisy (via the "also").
"MMfA; Highlighted Tea Party protests in a negative disruptive manner. Highlight Wisconsin protests as perfectly reasonable."--right ON2
MMFA highlighted the WI protests as reasonable?
"Many republicans wallow in the double standard just as many democrats do. It favors neither."--right ON2
I like pancakes!
"The reasoning behind it is always sound and perfectly acceptable when it's your issue, but if it's not then it's rude and slanderous."--right ON2
Um..somebody's issue is valid depending whether or not it's theirs? So reasoning is irrelevant?
"MMfA can hide behind their mission statement all day long, but that doesn't necessarily mean their double standard, or many of the commenting posters, can't be highlighted when it comes to their selective outrage."--right ON2
MMFA's double standard is what again? Oh, wait, did you show that they supported or pushed for or defended shutting down the Republican town hall?
"Evidence? If you can show me where MMfA, or its leftwing posters, are as outraged by these Wisconsin protesters as they were with the Tea Party ones, I will withdraw my 'accusations'."--right ON2
MMFA is required to show outrage to discount your as-yet undefined double standard?
"MMfA doesn't "denounce" anything flat out. They selectively put out pieces of media reporting with only conservatives as the bad guys, aka their mission statement. But if you don't think a thread like this doesn't highlight their partisan double standard, well we disagree."--right ON2
Okay, MMFA doesn't denounce, but they still have a double standard. Did this double standard that you have not mentioned have anything to do with MMFA not supporting the Republican town hall protest?
"You refuse to accept it when your liberal or democratic cronies act just like conservative or republican cronies."--right ON2
I like pancakes!
"And I have told you over and over that by defending these protesters while doing the exact opposite to the Tea Party protesters is one helluva hypocritical stance. "--right ON2
So you showed us that MMFA is defending these protesters?
"Highlighting leftwing hypocrisy does not in any way alleviate or minimize rightwing hypocrisy."--right ON2
What left wing hypocrisy have you highlighted?
"Fine, then I will wait for MMfA to embrace their double standard hypocrisy on media misinformation issues. In other words, honesty in their statements."--right ON2
The double standard that you have not defined which has yet to be demonstrated as hypocrisy should be embraced.
This is indeed like herding cats, like dpjohan said.
It is like explaining algebra to a five year old.
I think Right ON 2 is algebra-aware. With algebra, if you have more variables than equations, you can't solve uniquely for all of the variables. You can't nail 'em all down. Right ON 2 throws enough stuff, enough variables, into the arena such that you can't nail down all the x's and y's and z's, so you get stuck in this circle of arguing about elements, an x here, a y there, but it amounts to nothing. You can't ever tie all the variables together and fathom a position to get real debate going.
Since you can't nail down a position, contending a few points and asking for clarity and arguing in circles, it's like playing Whac-A-Mole: for Right ON 2, it's a victory of nothing every time.
jamesB
Riverdog
CenterRight
RaisedRight
etc, etc.
He's trying out new personas. At least he's mostly stopped posting under multiple screen names in the same topic just so that he can thumb down posts and mimic what his other screen names are saying!
But Fox News is saying that it's okay for one group to do it, but not for another group to do it. That's the topic that you should be discussing, but are studiously avoiding. The hypocrisy is the topic here, not whether or not these types of protests are justifiable or wise.
That's what this is a clear example of.
It's not that he isn't capable of understanding your position, it's just a question of what would he get out of it by acknowledging it. We'd all move on, and his ego would shrink back down to pocket-size.
I must admit, I don't like rude behavior at public gatherings, but the Teabaggers set the standard two summers ago. Now they can live with it. Democrats are just playing on the field that the Troglodytes have lined off.
There is an old saying that "turnabout is fair play", and while I don't necessarily agree with that statement, it's ironic and sad how disconnected and disingenuous right wingers are when their own tactics get thrown back in their faces. Perhaps "you can dish it out, but you can't take it" is more appropriate?
Steve Doocy says this with a straight face, oh my goodness! These faux people are shameless. At every turn they promote repubtard and teatard causes and slam the left. Doocy look sat himself in the mirror every morning and when no one is watching or listening he look sin the mirror and says "hey handsome, I do not care that I am a freakin hypocrite, I bring home a sweet paycheck for it, so I do not care."
Fox and Friends are flip floppers!
Also, when the right was going to town hall meetings, they were demanding to be hear, and demanding answers from their representives, but in the event in the main video abobe, that was not the case. The lefties didn't want to talk and have discourse, they just wanted to hold signs and disrupt everthing.
PS. Not sure why I bother posting, the open-minded people at MM seem to make sure my posts never get past the moderator.
"The lefties didn't want to talk and have discourse, they just wanted to hold signs and disrupt everthing."
So-- The video from the tea party people yelling and disrupting attempts of their legislators to be heard at all was just bogus. Got it.
Can you point out where that happened, please, since I never saw that.
I did see a bunch of right wing commentators jump up right away and start complaining about how people were "blaming them".
Really? Are you complaining because you are new and they are "reviewing" your post before it is actually posted, or have you been naughty and tried to post something you shouldn't have? (profanity)
If you are complaing about the "review process" either buck up or leave. Everyone goes through it and it "seems" to take forever. (sigh)
tea party people shouting down their representatives
you get 578,000 hits . .
[eyeball roll]
Tea Party Town Hall Strategy
Perhaps the Liberals should just go to Nevada and listen to Dingy Hairy Reed recite some cowboy poetry.
Thanks!
Although come to think of it, ever since she was replaced as speaker of the house, they haven't had time to ridicule her with petty and immature attacks.
Blah Blah Blah talking points Blah Blah Blah union corruption union Blah Blah Blah Evil Liberal Progressives Blah Blah Blah Patriotic Tea Party Real Americans Blah Blah Blah.
Lets keep it civil, its not nice to wish brain damage on anyone no matter how much you dislike their political ideology
You sir, are unfortunately afflicted with a condition that leaves you unable to comprehend the very concept of irony. I can't believe you posted that here of all places. Have you seen the quality of the typical right wing post?
Yes, of course it is the working man who is ripping off the working man. It couldn't possibly be the billionaires. I lived in a racially divided Midwestern city in the early 80s and was young enough to still be amazed to see the wealthy, mostly white, politicians use the racial divide to maintain their power over the middle and lower classes. All they did was periodically tell poor blacks their jobs were being stolen by redneck whites and on alternate days tell the poor whites they were being done in by welfare queens and affirmative action.
It was a sight to see, but, as Batman used to say, "If only they had used their genius for good instead of evil."
And they'll continue to rip off the taxpayer, ship jobs overseas, and blame the "liberals."
It's transparent.
A complete fabrication. This would qualify very much as "blah blah blah". There is no evidence to support this.
You'll have to explain what you mean by that statement. Please explain who these "inconsequential humans" are. Sounds pretty elitist to me. I thought elitism was the operating method of the left.
That's quite an interpretation, loaded with all the dog whistle words typical of the right wing fear mongering methodology. If you redefine enough words and apply paranoid hyperbole, then I suppose you could claim that it isn't a totally unhinged and baseless attack.
Please explain to us all about this supposed anti-American heritage. I await your enlightened response since I was born into an America that has protected the right to collective bargaining.
This may be the root of your problem. You have allowed yourself to be convinced of patriotic superiority, and therefore those who differ from your opinions are defined as unpatriotic. This type of attitude is narcissistic and fatalistic. Who are you to question my patriotism, or the patriotism of others? Since when does blindly signing on to an astroturf movement funded by wealthy propagandists give you the right to accuse others of treachery and question their patriotism?
You should take a moment to look at the people feeding you this paranoid outrage everyday, you may not like what you find when you stop wallowing in your self righteous indignation.
"The Liberal Progressive machine will be further exposed for the anti-American heritage it bears. Soon the truth by the Conservative movement promoted by the TEA Party and true Americans will crush the essence of this treachery. "...nice quote...who's website or blog did you paste that from?
Just because your enjoy being teabagged doesn't mean you have to try and cover it up with your usual vitriol.
The people need to know the truth about who is backing the tea party, fox news, and what they stand for.
http://www.youtube.com/user/oldfartrants#p/a/u/0/ArmgtEGfHjw
Unfortunately, the majority of those that responded to your insight are people that really don't want truth, facts or history, they want someone to take care of them.. Keep them fed and warm, and most importantly eliminate those nasty inequalities between the bourgeoisie and the proletariat.
But then again TEA Partiers weren't vandalizing public property, rioting and getting arrested.
Were they.