Adolf Bush, Free speech what is that?

As much as i'd love to be with you on this one in a classroom it's neccessary to check your personal views at the door when concerning things of this nature not only for job security but for the sake of the student's education. I'm kinda with both parties involved on this:

If the students felt that strongly about what was said or the issue of free speech to protest beans to them, i'm all for it.

If the school honestly didn't feel the teacher was providing any opening for opposing opinions then they were right in their suspension of the teacher.

Learning is about free idea exchange not propagandist bantering in the classroom. i wasen't there, i don't know what was said, maybe it wasen't as bad as that.

Unfortunately there is no direct tie to the government or the powers that be in this one so it's a huge shrugfest. As a teacher you know when entering into that sorta subject matter you walk the line with your administrative bosses.
 
One sided teaching from either side is wrong. Teachers should be politically neutral when teaching students with the exception of open classroom discussions. One sided lecturing has no business in the classroom. They can say whatever they want outside the classroom.
 
Jesus man .. let it all out .. don't hold back, tell us how you really feel ... just do it in the goddamn FB.
 
When the title of a thread directly names you and becomes or is directly a flame i think you've got a point, this is not the case .. just more of the same thing from you... posturing for the sake of your values, which i can dig .. but there's a place for it.

Per usual had you read the entire post without going ballistic and thinking up your response you would've noticed the title refers to a quote in the article as well as we all know DD's feelings about the president.

How to respond and disagree: See Mokk and Rones.

How to show your ass and do yourself no credit: See Firestreak.

See? now we both might get in trouble AND you have a reason to be pissed off.
 
Last edited:
Mokk said:
When the title of a thread directly names you and becomes or is directly a flame i think you've got a point, this is not the case .. just more of the same thing from you... posturing for the sake of your values, which i can dig .. but there's a place for it.

Per usual had you read the entire post without going ballistic and thinking up your response you would've noticed the title refers to a quote in the article as well as we all know DD's feelings about the president.

How to respond and disagree: See Mokk and Rones.

How to show your ass and do yourself no credit: See Firestreak.

See? now we both might get in trouble AND you have a reason to be pissed off.
Click to expand...

A flame is a flame, at bush, bush supporters, the principle of the school, whatever. My values are not the same as Bush's, and quite often not the same as the Republican party in many ways. I simply recognize idiots making stupid posts on the internet. Unfortunately, they tend to be demcorats.

I read the post, and I read the link. What I noticed, and Darkdante did not, was that Bush had nothing to do with this entire incident, except for being the subject that was the catalyst here. No where in the article was Bush called Adolf Bush. He was compared to Adolf Hitler, but that wording was invested by Darkedante.

This subject: "Adolf Bush, Free speech what is that?" seems like it's a question directed at Bush, as if he's involved in some piss-ant teacher's career.

But thank you for dragging a flame, in response to a flame that was well targeted and throw your tiny dick at it.
 
Firestreak said:
A flame is a flame, at bush, bush supporters, the principle of the school, whatever. My values are not the same as Bush's, and quite often not the same as the Republican party in many ways. I simply recognize idiots making stupid posts on the internet. Unfortunately, they tend to be demcorats.

I read the post, and I read the link. What I noticed, and Darkdante did not, was that Bush had nothing to do with this entire incident, except for being the subject that was the catalyst here. No where in the article was Bush called Adolf Bush. He was compared to Adolf Hitler, but that wording was invested by Darkedante.

This subject: "Adolf Bush, Free speech what is that?" seems like it's a question directed at Bush, as if he's involved in some piss-ant teacher's career.

But thank you for dragging a flame, in response to a flame that was well targeted and throw your tiny dick at it.
Click to expand...

This is a news article meant for discussion, had it been in the FB it would be a flame, you fail at the boards. I managed to bring up your same point without having a anurizm over the issue and getting all emo, how hard is it? Rones did just the same.

Do you speak for Bush? didn't think so so make your opinion in a civilized manner or take that shit to the FB and get your frustrations out there.
 
Last edited:
Firestreak, you can argue your points all you want. When you throw personal attacks on any of the posters in this thread into your response, then you are out of line, as you well know. I advise to act accordingly.
 
Another important distinction, from the title, it appears as the free speech of the teacher being tested is the reason that Bush is being called Adolf Bush. It's the reverse, the comparing of Bush to Hitler is the reason that his teacher methods are called into question. Just the same as we have free speech but as a teacher I can't just stand up and start screaming "penis, cock, vagina" over and over. I'm just as for censoring the politics in the classroom as many democrats are for wanting to censor religion in the classroom. The kids are legally obligated to be there, so just teach the fucking facts.
By calling GWB a Nazi over this incident, which he had no involvement with anyway, Darkdante is in fact making that insult himself as no one in the article did. It's not merely a "quote."

And as a Jew I find it disgusting how people overuse the Nazi insult for mere political gain. Don't forget what the real Nazis did, and don't forget they still exist in this world. Don't take it so god damn lightly.
 
Firestreak said:
Another important distinction, from the title, it appears as the free speech of the teacher being tested is the reason that Bush is being called Adolf Bush. It's the reverse, the comparing of Bush to Hitler is the reason that his teacher methods are called into question. Just the same as we have free speech but as a teacher I can't just stand up and start screaming "penis, cock, vagina" over and over. I'm just as for censoring the politics in the classroom as many democrats are for wanting to censor religion in the classroom. The kids are legally obligated to be there, so just teach the fucking facts.
By calling GWB a Nazi over this incident, which he had no involvement with anyway, Darkdante is in fact making that insult himself as no one in the article did. It's not merely a "quote."

And as a Jew I find it disgusting how people overuse the Nazi insult for mere political gain. Don't forget what the real Nazis did, and don't forget they still exist in this world. Don't take it so god damn lightly.
Click to expand...

Bravo, look we agree on something!'

omgtheskyisfalling :)
 
Firestreak said:
I'm just as for censoring the politics in the classroom as many democrats are for wanting to censor religion in the classroom.
Click to expand...
Are you saying that Republicans, in general, do not believe in the seperation of Church and State?
 
Let us not forget the independants and libretarians.

I for one am all for prayer in school so long as the school does not make it a mandatory thing under captive audience.

Under no circumstances IMO should we not have to say the pledge, provided you are a legal citizen. Nor should "under god" be removed from the pledge, our currency, etc.

Too many people forget that this isn't a two party system, it's just that those two parties have all the money.
 
A vast majority who don't, in respect to ID, claim no politcal affiliation and don't vote. There's more religious folk on that argument than political, it's kind of a sketchy example.
 
The same kind of people who believe you should teach creationism are the same kind of people, statically who might feel strongly against gay marriage and abortion, leaning them in the direction of Republicans.

The reason I like the "two party system" that seems to have sprung up is, everyone can vote on their most important values and everyone is somewhat happy, as opposed to if there were 20 parties and every election 88% of the country is pissed off.
 
I can dig the rationalisation, but right now alot of people don't trust republicans and don't see democrats doing much but finger pointing and being vague in the interest of saving face.

I'd like the two party system alot more if it wasen't that way strictly because of the money the dominant parties have. Ideally John Q. Citizen should be able to run for office no matter how much cash he has and still have relative success, unfortunately and idealisticly i find it a shame this is no longer the case.

I think polarization is a bad thing. For me it seems a more beneficial thing to have at least a few more colors than red and blue to choose from.
 
Last edited:
Firestreak said:
Another important distinction, from the title, it appears as the free speech of the teacher being tested is the reason that Bush is being called Adolf Bush. It's the reverse, the comparing of Bush to Hitler is the reason that his teacher methods are called into question. Just the same as we have free speech but as a teacher I can't just stand up and start screaming "penis, cock, vagina" over and over. I'm just as for censoring the politics in the classroom as many democrats are for wanting to censor religion in the classroom. The kids are legally obligated to be there, so just teach the fucking facts.
By calling GWB a Nazi over this incident, which he had no involvement with anyway, Darkdante is in fact making that insult himself as no one in the article did. It's not merely a "quote."

And as a Jew I find it disgusting how people overuse the Nazi insult for mere political gain. Don't forget what the real Nazis did, and don't forget they still exist in this world. Don't take it so god damn lightly.
Click to expand...

Ya know, the Nazis did other things in their spare time when they wern't trying to kill off the Jewish population as a whole for no good reason.

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff01062004.html

Still, it is a pretty far fetched comparison. Hitler was unquestionably elected in a fully democratic election, actually served his time in the army, and he didn't drink or do drugs.
 
Trippyhippy said:
Ya know, the Nazis did other things in their spare time when they wern't trying to kill off the Jewish population as a whole for no good reason.

http://www.counterpunch.org/lindorff01062004.html

Still, it is a pretty far fetched comparison. Hitler was unquestionably elected in a fully democratic election, actually served his time in the army, and he didn't drink or do drugs.
Click to expand...

The nazis did plenty, but when you insult a person using nazi, you are implying about the horrible things they did.

Your link doesn't work.

Bush actually got the popular vote in 2004, Hitler never had the popular vote. You can thank Hitler's election to a system that had more than 2 parties with real power.

I guess Bush spent his time not serving with Clinton. Where they smoked drugs together but Clinton didn't inhale. It's a good thing I never bashed on Clinton for that, but I'd hate to think Trippyhippy ever entered an argument about Clinton not mentioning that, less he be a hypocrite.

Bill Clinton is no better than Bush.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top