Romney wants to get rid of PBS......

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by OCCH

Can you really say with a straight face that these "needy" kids aren't walking around with designer sneakers and newest generation ipods? That they don't have computers at home that could stream SS episodes 24/7 if they wanted?

I taught 8th grade for six years in Union City (an Abbott district right outside NYC) and loved every minute of it. But it was crystal clear that the parents who wanted to take advantage of all the programs offered to their kids did, and the ones who didn't were useless. Maybe NYC is different, but PBS is DEFINITELY not a deal breaker . . .

Some "needy" kids are walking around with designer sneakers and newest generation ipods. How about the rest that arent? There are numerous kids in my classes presently who do not get cable tv or have internet.

In the end, what difference does it make? I am educated, I have the means to purchase cable TV and the internet. I also enjoy PBS television programing because I believe I am get less corporate driven bias than on other stations. I believe that shows like Frontline and NOVA are extremely important to all American people, not just the poor. It keeps everyone in check much more than stations who rely on corporate sponsorship.

Its not surprising that Romney would want to take this station away from all citizens. Many of the programs on PBS investigate big corporations and how they wrong the common person.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Typical, no response to MANY ways that the elitist Mitt Romney could have mentioned to cut instead of PBS. Just ignore that the most unbiased programing with little to no corporate sponsorship is what Mitt Romney wants to cut before any ridiculous perk he would enjoy in the White House.

PBS WAS SIMPLY AN EXAMPLE HE USED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MODERATOR HIMSELF BEING FROM PBS.

Seriously, your line of reasoning here is moronic. Absolutely moronic. I weep for your students.

[OCCH]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Some "needy" kids are walking around with designer sneakers and newest generation ipods. How about the rest that arent? There are numerous kids in my classes presently who do not get cable tv or have internet.

In the end, what difference does it make? I am educated, I have the means to purchase cable TV and the internet. I also enjoy PBS television programing because I believe I am get less corporate driven bias than on other stations. I believe that shows like Frontline and NOVA are extremely important to all American people, not just the poor. It keeps everyone in check much more than stations who rely on corporate sponsorship.

Its not surprising that Romney would want to take this station away from all citizens. Many of the programs on PBS investigate big corporations and how they wrong the common person.

First of all, you are either ignorant of the fact that Romney chose PBS because of the moderator, or it's just easier to get on your soapbox if you think he has a death wish for Big Bird.

Second, I challenge you to think of ONE student whose success is dependent on PBS. ONE student with caring parents, ONE student who already takes advantage of the ABUNDANT programs already available to him/her, but just can't overcome because they didn't have Grover growing up. ONE student who actually cares about his education, but is limited because of what he was able to watch on TV. If you can even think of one, that's one more than I've come across in 19 years of teaching. In fact, I have the exact opposite experience. Students who overcome all odds because they're determined to do so, or have a support structure at home keeping them in line, or a teacher who finds a way to "light the fire". Amazing stories that I refuse to believe wouldn't have been written without Elmo.

Every day I teach/live, one truth becomes more and more evident -- an entitlement mentality is KILLING this country. Every year it gets worse -- kids who don't think they have to do anything, and parents who back them up. And now we're just adding one more excuse to the list -- "rich people took away Oscar the Grouch, so I ended up living in a garbage can myself" . . .

[OCCH]

Originally Posted by shakin318

PBS WAS SIMPLY AN EXAMPLE HE USED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MODERATOR HIMSELF BEING FROM PBS.

Seriously, your line of reasoning here is moronic. Absolutely moronic. I weep for your students.

And sadly it's a rampant problem.

If I had to hear one more colleague talk about "killing Big Bird" and saying it with a straight face . . .

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by shakin318

PBS WAS SIMPLY AN EXAMPLE HE USED IN THE CONTEXT OF THE MODERATOR HIMSELF BEING FROM PBS.

Seriously, your line of reasoning here is moronic. Absolutely moronic. I weep for your students.

Righhhhht, perfectly defended like a true Republican, he said he was going to look into cutting PBS, because its always a great idea to threaten the moderators means of income, Romney never retracted, and now it was just an example and he really didnt mean it.

Coming from a party that historically is criticized for not having their pulse on the common person.

BTW, if you were a real Republican you would use an even bigger font to get your point across.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Its not surprising that Romney would want to take this station away from all citizens. Many of the programs on PBS investigate big corporations and how they wrong the common person.

Um, speaking of "big corporations," PBS executives are filthy rich off of merchandising from Sesame Street. How much money do you think "Tickle Me Elmo" took in when it was the hottest toy for Christmas? How about Sesame Street videos? Games? Toys? Lunchboxes? Apparel? Halloween Costumes?

Sesame Street is a HUGE money-making operation. Why the f-ck should my tax dollars go towards something that is clearly commercially viable ON ITS OWN, while the people at the helm of it's GIANT merchandising beast live the life of your hated "one-percenters?"

Answer me this, professor.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Righhhhht, perfectly defended like a true Republican, he said he was going to look into cutting PBS,

He never said he wanted to cut PBS. What he said was he wanted to STOP GIVING TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO PBS. If you are in fact an educator, you should be able to grasp the cavernous divide between the two.

[JetPotato]

Originally Posted by copernicus

ROFLMAO!! Link? To data that shows how the world collapses if we have no PBS? You are hysterical! Yeah the world wont collapse initially, just like the student in the classroom, you wont see the damaging affects until years later.

Sorry no link to the ridiculous idea of seeing into the future of what the world might look like if there were no PBS, but here is a quote from Lavar Burton. An actor who has dedicated his life to children's programing through PBS and others.

http://news.feedzilla.com/en_us/stor...rmat=json&sb=1

"I am personally outraged that any serious contender for the White House would target as part of his campaign the children of America in this fashion. Educators across the country, as well as millions of children and adults know that the programming on PBS has been responsible for significant improvements in education, literacy, math, science and life skills for generations of our children." "On behalf of America's children, I can't stay silent," Burton continued. "I encourage you to join me in fighting this short-sighted and frankly mean-spirited attack on our children."

Hope Mitt Romney and all the Republicans sleep easy knowing Mitt has THREE full kitchens filled with staff in case he wants a midnight snack while unprivileged kids start school further behind.

Romney just mentioning cutting PBS before he would cut any ridiculous perks that he would have in the White House on the backs of children shows how disconnected he and the Republican party are.

And you're proving how disconnected you are from reality when you think that:

- There could possibly be a more relatable example of waste to the maximum number of voters that Romney could have used than Sesame Street
- That a better example would be White House perks most can't relate to
- You base your opinions on quotes from actors instead of facts

More standard issue nonsense from you.

Seriously, what school? It's important for me to know.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

its always a great idea to threaten the moderators means of income, Romney never retracted, and now it was just an example and he really didnt mean it.

When the hell did I say he didn't really mean it? He used it as a single example of HOW HE WOULD DETERMINE THE NECESSITY OF A PROGRAM. He damn well meant it, and that's exactly why he WILL NOT RETRACT IT.

I know this is all so incredibly tough for you to comprehend due to the fact that you support a candidate that lies as easily as we all breathe. And the fact that you whine about Romney "threatening the moderator's means of income" as if you would prefer he suck the same moderator's balls is extremely telling.

You are making a complete fool of yourself here.

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by shakin318

Um, speaking of "big corporations," PBS executives are filthy rich off of merchandising from Sesame Street. How much money do you think "Tickle Me Elmo" took in when it was the hottest toy for Christmas? How about Sesame Street videos? Games? Toys? Lunchboxes? Apparel? Halloween Costumes?

Sesame Street is a HUGE money-making operation. Why the f-ck should my tax dollars go towards something that is clearly commercially viable ON ITS OWN, while the people at the helm of it's GIANT merchandising beast live the life of your hated "one-percenters?"

Answer me this, professor.

Good point something that should be investigated as to how that money is spent.

Romney chose to go after PBS, the same budget that is spent every 4 hours to run the Pentagon. He could have used any example but chose a network that often goes after big corporations, the types that he is connected to.

With that said, there are other programs on PBS that bring in zero profit off merchandizing that keep others in check.

Why dont Republicans get this upset about charter schools? Same idea, more money being made.

Tax payers fund charter schools by allowing them to be housed in public schools. Charter schools are usually sponsored by the Walmarts and McDonalds of the world. Poisoning children's brains from the start to buy their products.

11 years in Afghanistan, the Republicans war, all that money that could have been spent here, but Romeny chose to comment about cutting PBS instead of real issues.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Good point something that should be investigated as to how that money is spent.

Romney chose to go after PBS, the same budget that is spent every 4 hours to run the Pentagon. He could have used any example but chose a network that often goes after big corporations, the types that he is connected to.

With that said, there are other programs on PBS that bring in zero profit off merchandizing that keep others in check.

Why dont Republicans get this upset about charter schools? Same idea, more money being made.

Tax payers fund charter schools by allowing them to be housed in public schools. Charter schools are usually sponsored by the Walmarts and McDonalds of the world. Poisoning children's brains from the start to buy their products.

11 years in Afghanistan, the Republicans war, all that money that could have been spent here, but Romeny choses PBS instead of real issues.

Do you understand the word "context?" Do you understand what it means? Is it in one of those "Teaching for Idiots" guides that tell teachers all the answers they should know themselves, but don't?

Seriously, I don't know how much more simply this can be explained to you. My dog understands it. It was a 3-second example given in the context of the man he was speaking to. I can assure you that Romney's entire deficit-reduction plan does not have a picture of Big Bird on the cover, and does not begin with PBS.

You are posting in this thread in the same exact style that Obama used to get his ass handed to him in the debate: Ignore what your opponent is saying and stick to the same moronic talking points you walked in with -- even after they have been exposed as moronic.

Seriously -- go look up the word "context." Then maybe we can move on from there.

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Good point something that should be investigated as to how that money is spent.

Hey, maybe FRONTLINE can investigate. I'll start holding my breath......NOW.

[copernicus]

Originally Posted by shakin318

Do you understand the word "context?" Do you understand what it means? Is it in one of those "Teaching for Idiots" guides that tell teachers all the answers they should know themselves, but don't?

Seriously, I don't know how much more simply this can be explained to you. My dog understands it. It was a 3-second example given in the context of the man he was speaking to. I can assure you that Romney's entire deficit-reduction plan does not have a picture of Big Bird on the cover, and does not begin with PBS.

You are posting in this thread in the same exact style that Obama used to get his ass handed to him in the debate: Ignore what your opponent is saying and stick to the same moronic talking points you walked in with -- even after they have been exposed as moronic.

Seriously -- go look up the word "context." Then maybe we can move on from there.

Thanks for explaining it to me. Spoken just like a true republican. He spoke out of context. Totally get how he would want to piss off the moderator as well. Makes total sense. I also totally trust Romney, the guy who would absolutely love to see the only network that investigates big business without hesitation because it is not sponsored by big business off the air. ........

[shakin318]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Thanks for explaining it to me. Spoken just like a true republican. He spoke out of context. Totally get how he would want to piss off the moderator as well. Makes total sense. I also totally trust Romney, the guy who would absolutely love to see the only network that investigates big business without hesitation because it is not sponsored by big business off the air. ........

Where the hell did I say he "spoke out of context?" He meant exactly what he said.

Sorry, but you clearly are as thick as a brick. Seriously, if this thread is any indication of your comprehension skills, you should not be allowed anywhere NEAR a classroom.

[palmetto defender]

I never had PBS as a small child. In fact my family did not even have a television until I was six. We didn't have much noney and my mother did not think it necessary.
I knew the alphabet and could read and write before I was four. Perhaps my parents understood their responsibilty.
My children were not watchers of PBS or Sesame Street. They weren't interested. They were interested in reading and were physically active.
I did just fine and my children are doing just fine.

[sackdance]

Originally Posted by OCCH

If I had to hear one more colleague talk about "killing Big Bird" and saying it with a straight face . . .

The Romney landslide is assured if this election boils down to "Save Big Bird" vs. "Save the economy"...

Obama is in huge re-election trouble. He pinned this campaign on defining Romney as a stuffed shirt - then nearly half the country tuned in to that narrative undone and reversed in 90 minutes.

So now it's crunch time for an administration with a penchant for making bad decisions.

Look for a solid "blue" state to suddenly lean red - and it will all be over.

[southparkcpa]

Originally Posted by OCCH

First of all, you are either ignorant of the fact that Romney chose PBS because of the moderator, or it's just easier to get on your soapbox if you think he has a death wish for Big Bird.



Every day I teach/live, one truth becomes more and more evident -- an entitlement mentality is KILLING this country. Every year it gets worse -- kids who don't think they have to do anything, and parents who back them up. And now we're just adding one more excuse to the list -- "rich people took away Oscar the Grouch, so I ended up living in a garbage can myself" . . .

I think I LOVE this guy. NO HOMO.

[Trades]

Originally Posted by copernicus

Thanks for explaining it to me. Spoken just like a true republican. He spoke out of context. Totally get how he would want to piss off the moderator as well. Makes total sense. I also totally trust Romney, the guy who would absolutely love to see the only network that investigates big business without hesitation because it is not sponsored by big business off the air. ........

Have you ever tuned in early as you are sitting down to watch Sesame Street? They list all of the CORPORATE SPONSORS that "made this program possible" before each PBS program?

No one is canceling PBS, they are just looking to take it off of the government teat.

[SafetyBlitz]

First off, stop asking someone where they work "what school?" - yea, it's nice and dramatic as usual, Jetpotato, but it's not what we do here. Anonymity = safety. Even if all the folks who post here are sane, which they are not, you never know about the lurkers - so drop it.

And as for the baby boomers ripping "todays generation of entitled brats", I have to LOL. Not only were you the generation that raised us, you were also the ones that designed a system wherein my generation must go to college, but barely can afford it. Plus you guys are responsible for the debt, the wars and the Wall Street collapse and why we don't have socialized medicine -



You rebelled against the greatest generation and became the sh*ttiest generation.

Btw, this whole thread is arguing .012% of the budget - politics fail!

[palmetto defender]

Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz

First off, stop asking someone where they work "what school?" - yea, it's nice and dramatic as usual, Jetpotato, but it's not what we do here. Anonymity = safety. Even if all the folks who post here are sane, which they are not, you never know about the lurkers - so drop it.

And as for the baby boomers ripping "todays generation of entitled brats", I have to LOL. Not only were you the generation that raised us, you were also the ones that designed a system wherein my generation must go to college, but barely can afford it. Plus you guys are responsible for the debt, the wars and the Wall Street collapse and why we don't have socialized medicine -



You rebelled against the greatest generation and became the sh*ttiest generation.

Btw, this whole thread is arguing .012% of the budget - politics fail!

In truth it was not the Baby Boomers who fouled it all up. They certainly contributed to it though.
The process began with those "Greatest Generation" people. They were the ones who demanded college education. And the beginning of the associated debt. And entitlements.
And war? With respect to those who have been injured and killed, the little affairs in Iraq and Afghanistan were/are, as I would call them "duck hunts".
It does seem though that the boomers have done no better job than their parents in general in raising children though.
There are many of us boomers who did things the right way and have transferred those value to out children. Obviously you are not one of the ones who received that benefit.