NEA on Sept. 11 - don't go blaming anybody, but criticizing U.S. or yourself is OK

The BBQ Pit
81

elucidator:

**
This has nothing to do with nothing, but I shook hands and talked with James Hoffa last week. Jimmy’s kid, and the president of the Teamsters. He didn’t have a cigar, though. Chomping a cigar would be pretty darn gross, in my opinion.

**
Fair enough. I’ve come to recognize that it doesn’t strike some people as at all odd that most aspects of what’s on the list are mentioned in a seemingly hit-it-and-move-on kind of way, and when it comes to past American transgressions that are only tangentially applicable, he offers suggestions on how to expound on them.

I can live with the fact that that doesn’t strike some people as odd. But it does strike me and some others as odd.

Now say we’re idiots. I’d expect nothing less.

**
If that were what it said, and it was left at that, I’d have no problem with it. Part CMVXXLVI. I believe I’ve already demonstrated the portion of the list that calls for taking a “blame-America” approach. Using one of the definitions of blame as described by Merriam-Webster, it is impossible not to see that passage as taking a “blame-America approach” to a Sept. 11 classroom remembrance, on the particular point.

Talking about how a woman was flirty in the past, or cruelly broke some men’s hearts, is somewhat inappropriate when recounting the instance in which she was gang-raped.

I think we’ve already addressed the “thrust” argument.

[hyperbolic example]

  1. Farming is a time-honored, pastoral trade, with deep roots in American history and culture.

  2. American farms provide much of the world’s food supply. The country is quite rightly known as the bread basket to the world.

  3. Farming became somewhat less productive, when the government made the poor decision to no longer allow farmers to own slaves. However, with techological advances in the past half-century or so, farms are becoming larger and more productive than ever.
    [/hyperbolic example]

(None of those facts above may even be true. I was making up a fictional example.)

The “thrust” of my comments above are that farming is an important part of American life. Does that make the bolded portion any less outrageous and offensive?

Dryga:

One assumes that only if one is a doofus.

My comments were in direct response to the following comment by TwistofFate:

The tips for teachers called on them to discuss Japanese internment camps during World War II. So I was saying in response to Twist’s comment: “I wasn’t aware the Sept. 11 hijackers were motivated by American Japanese internment camps during World War II.”

Even if this were not in response to Twist, the comment is that I am NOT aware Japanese internment camps during WWII were a cause of the Sept. 11 attacks.

Hello? McFly?

**
So the fuck what? And if a discussion goes in that direction, Lippencott wants the teacher to follow his occasionally flawed as hell thinking, as expressed on certain points on his list. The net result is the same.

**
Thank you for giving me a lesson on taking things out of context. You might want to take a wee closer look at my every response to you. It’s all you have done.

**
And some people just get very tired of certain others who try to win a war of attrition by ignoring the same points over and over, then declaring themselves the victor. I’m about to join them.

82

Milo, you’re not a very skilled liar are you? Although Dryga_Yes has responded to everything in your last post so adequately (and elucidator has summed up so well) that I don’t really need to address your tripe, I’ll respond to your opening BFL (big fat lie).

Now, here’s how I represented Milo’s position, folks: “[Milo believes] that the NEA is actively discouraging discussion regarding the culpability of al Qaeda.” Note, that I also represent Milo as saying that the NEA is “advocating a ‘blame America’ attitude [and] encouraging American self-flagellation,” which, since M hasn’t whined about, I assume he agrees do accurately represent his allegation.

From where did I derive these suppositions? Let’s try the OP, in which Milo himself does a bit of representing. Here he tells us what he thinks the NEA position is:

Seems like Milo’s trying to tell us the NEA doesn’t want kids to talk about al Qaeda’s culpability to me. Also seems like M believes they want kids to blame themselves. But that’s just my interpretation, I guess. It’s possible Milo doesn’t understand English composition (actually, considering his interpretation of the Reviled List, this is not an absurd possibility). It’s possible this professional writer accidently twisted his own message in his presentation. But I believe he’s just trying to scurry away from an ill-considered OP because it’s not supportable. Lord knows, that’s easier than admitting error.

As to my belief that M and others are attempting to portray the NEA as left wing nutter America haters, which Jackmannii tells me is my attempt to construct a Great Right Wing Conspiracy, let’s read again from the OP:

Mmmm… hmm. Yep, I must just be paranoid.

83

What makes you look like a half-baked conspiracy theorist is focusing on the Washington Times and attempting to lump everyone who recognizes the idiocy of several N.E.A. proposals into one big festering stewpot of leftist bashers.
You could have mentioned the Columbus Dispatch, a paper with centrist editorial views which frequently criticizes Bush Jr., but which I cited as critiquing the N.E.A., but I guess that had to be omitted as not fitting in with your preconceived notions (oh, and here’s another non-Moonie paper weighing in on the matter).

If you can find any comments in which I suggested that the N.E.A.'s lesson plans are part of a leftist campaign to brainwash our gullible youth, then I’ll buy you a new tinfoil hat.

The fact is that it’s purely silly and offensive for the N.E.A. to take a national day of mourning and remembrance, and recommend using it to steer discussion away from those culpable, and instead to zero in on a past we’ve outgrown long ago. Recognizing that has little to do with ideology. There are certainly elements of both the loony Left and Right that have seized on the events of 9/11 to blame America and indulge in self-hate (in the view of some far-right groups, we have gotten our just deserts for Waco and Ruby Ridge).

As an alternative to the left vs. right mud-slinging, consider the Tuesday piece on this site.

84

Jackmanii:

OK, that’s Milo.

It would be, if anyone had evidence that that was their intent. The Reviled List, by itself, does not constitute evidence of that, for the reasons I’ve beaten a horse to death with. (Though I’ll return to them later in this post. Sigh.)

In the case of the Washington Times and the Richmond Times-Disgrace, I’m sure it did. (Since the RTD repeated the Moonie paper’s factual mistakes as well as other stuff, I’m guessing that their ideology led them to trust that the Moonie paper had actually done its homework.)

Now in other instances, it may just have been stupidity.

Now, Milo’s turn:

Show the fuckwit:

Numero uno: Who gives a flip about Lippincott? You wrote the thread title. See “Lippincott” in there? Neither do I.

Numero two-o: It means that the NEA wasn’t suggesting that anyone make the Japanese internment camps or non-discrimination against Arab-Americans the focus of their lecture on 9/11, contrary to numerous assertions here.

Numero three-o: The NEA having linked to Lippincott’s list means that a teacher who took the time to get that far in the first place would have responses already in mind if some kid suggests throwing all the Ay-Rabs in prison. Then the teacher could say, “Like we did with the Japanese-Americans in WWII?” and while the kid’s figuring out how to respond to that, get back to the frickin’ lesson plan.

IOW, Lippincott’s list, as a piece of backup material, gives the teacher some tools to short-circuit a hijack with, and get the discussion back on a constructive track. I don’t find any evidence to suggest that the NEA wants teachers to use such a diversion to turn the class into a mini-lecture on the Japanese internment camps in WWII. Especially when the NEA doesn’t seem to link to any sites that provide actual details about such camps that would allow the teacher to go on for more than 30 seconds about their existence.

I’ve been taking this as a given from the beginning, but maybe it isn’t so obvious to people who’ve never taught a class: if you’re going to have a lecture, you have to have something to say. Lippincott’s list doesn’t provide lecture material about the internment camps; all it does is mention them. If you’re saying the NEA wants the teachers to turn this reference into a lecture, where’s the frickin’ lesson plan??

Oh. They didn’t provide one.

I guess the NEA was going to send it out to all the teachers by secret email or something. Or maybe all the NEA teachers were in such a mind-meld with the NEA that they were all going to look up enough info about the Japanese-American internments to lecture on them for 30 minutes or so.

You’ve long ago joined the ranks of those who’ve been ignoring the same points over and over. I’ve given you a certain challenge (multiple times, really), and others have since reiterated it. But you continue to choose to hew to an interpretation of Lippincott’s words that only works by denying his words their context, and you turn around and blame your opponents of ignoring your points.

Speaking of which, I notice you’re repeating M-W robotically as if neither Dryga nor I had responded to your initial cite of their definition.

[debate rules]
Believe it or not, it’s actually legitimate to not respond to every last assertion another poster makes. But if you make an assertion, and it’s contradicted by another poster, you can’t just keep on reiterating your assertion without responding to what the other poster has to say.
[/debate rules]

That’s the game you’ve been playing here. I suppose it’s a technically more advanced game than making mud pies. But mud pies have greater integrity.

85

On a scale of 1 to 10 in fighting ignorance, learning that the Washington Times is also known as The Moonie Paper ranks as a 9. :smiley:

86

Wow. You are kinda hard-of-thinking, aren’t you? Let me reconstruct it for you, since you’re apparently incapable of figuring out the use of the scroll bar to the right of your screen.

In reply to your droolingly moronic charge regarding the NEA’s ludicrous zeal to prevent the 9/11 remembrance from including mention of blame attaching to any group or nation for the terrorist attacks I told you that the only ludicrous --and sickening-- zeal I can personally find in this argument is that of those who wish to portray the NEA as a bunch of fuzzy-headed America haters. So far, that includes the Washington Times, Milo, december and you. In your latest link to a newspaper editorial, the Richmond Times-Dispatch seems to be trying the “leftist basher” shoe on for size, however they just stick to implying that message: “…the National Education Association is slipping off the edge of the political spectrum into the ideological abyss.” (I presume that would be the left edge, but it’s not explicitly stated. :rolleyes: )

The earlier linked editorial, to the Columbus Dispatch, joined the strident chorus of prevarication regarding the message of the NEA, but didn’t indulge in any bashing of leftists that I could see.

And I’ll let your characterization of James Lileks as merely an “alternative to the left vs. right mud-slinging” speak for itself, as it says volumes about your sense of balance.

87

“Anyone to the right of me must be a reactionary”, huh?

If it’s any consolation, xeno, I’ve never thought of you particularly as a left-wing idiot - just as a shithead in general.
Your performance in this thread, however (i.e. your strident attempts to persuade us that we should ignore the N.E.A.'s stupid and offensive lesson plans on the grounds that its overall message is sound) leads me to believe that you have a great future awaiting you in public relations. Corporate America would love a spokesman with your talents. For instance, in the event of a plane crash, your press release would probably open like this:

“99.5% of U.S. Airways flights today arrived safely at their planned destinations.”
Hang in there, babe. When common sense threatens to rear its ugly head, wave your arms and use labels.

88

“Anyone to the right of me must be a reactionary”, huh?

If it’s any consolation, xeno, I’ve never thought of you particularly as a left-wing idiot - just as a shithead in general.
Your performance in this thread, however (i.e. your strident attempts to persuade us that we should ignore the N.E.A.'s stupid and offensive lesson plans on the grounds that its overall message is sound) leads me to believe that you have a great future awaiting you in public relations. Corporate America would love a spokesman with your talents. For instance, in the event of a plane crash, your press release would probably open like this:

“99.5% of U.S. Airways flights today arrived safely at their planned destinations.”
Hang in there, babe. When common sense threatens to rear its ugly head, wave your arms and use labels.

89

I hasten to remind you that you have yet to cite anything from one of the NEA’s lesson plans. You apparently know nothing about those lesson plans, except for the excerpts that xenophon has quoted, which appear neither stupid nor offensive.

Get your facts straight, please.

90

Sorry, Rufe, but those are my principles. And if you don’t like them, I have others.

*If you’re reduced to ignoring inconvenient facts instead of attempting to respond to them, we might as well just exchange Groucho-isms.

91

So, we are to believe that… You hold as a principle that anything than can be clicked to from the NEA’s website must necessarily be a lesson plan, and must necessarily be an integral part of their agenda?

Ignoring inconvenient facts? Yeah, hi.

92

Oh, oops. I got the impression that it was just an afterthought to the OP, and was a sarcastic response to the article you’d quoted.

WT: * "[NEA] takes a decidedly blame-America approach, urging educators to ‘discuss historical instances of American intolerance,’ so that the American public avoids ‘repeating terrible mistakes.’
‘Internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor and the backlash against Arab Americans during the Gulf War are obvious examples,’ the plan says. "*
Milo: “I wasn’t aware the Sept. 11 hijackers were motivated by American Japanese internment camps during World War II.”

And other than this comment, which was just a misunderstanding on my part, I’d like to know what comments of yours I’ve taken out of context. I mean, you said that that’s all I’ve done in this thread, so a few examples shouldn’t be too much to ask for.

93

Jackass, I aint a spokesman for anything other than rational consideration. You (and the others I’ve named) are the ones making demonstrably false assertions. I (and RT, Dryga and others) are merely demonstrating the falseness of your position. You are the bunk providers, we are the debunkers.

Any time any of you wanted to, you could’ve said something like “Gee, guys; actually looking at what the NEA offers in their website, I see now that they’re not promoting American self-flagellation or tip-toeing around al Qaeda. I still believe Dr. Lippincott’s list is doing so, however.” This would’ve gone a long way to strengthen your position (although it would still be a stupid position). But so far, none of you have even admitted what’s plainly evident regarding the NEA’s site, lesson plans and other links.

I guess to someone who loves his own ignorance so much he must spread it around on a message board, anyone who tries to shed actual light on the subject must seem like a “shithead”. So from you, Jack, I’ll take that as a compliment.

94

Or at least you’d like to think so.

95

I love the “aint”. It lends such a common, man-of-the-people approach. :smiley:

Don’t sell yourself short, though. You serve as a marvelous spokesman for public education, in much the same way as december is a peerless spokesman for the Israeli cause; in both cases giving support and encouragement to the opposition. The “school choice” crowd benefits immeasurably from the head-in-the-sand approach of dolts like you.

There’s nothing like the bleatings of a xeno-phony liberal to damage the progressive cause.

96

TO: Ms. Hilary Clinton, Chair, Subversion Committee, Fourth International Comintern (Trotskyist)

FROM: elucidator, Propaganda Agent, SDMB

SUBJECT: failure of NEA campaign

As you know, we have been working diligently to undermine the American public’s awareness and to promote the cause of ignorance by infilitrating the SDMB. Our plans have met with some success, but we are stymied by the continued resistance of such as Milossarian, et al. who have proved immune to “facts” and persuasion.

They have countered with the Chebacca Defense, and with an utterly devestating “neener-neener”. We are ill-equipped to respond to such, and our “blame America for everything” campaign is, at least temporarily, stymied.

Though xenophon (see Liberal Dupes and Useful Idiots, Vol. 1) has labored commendably, he insists on conducting an argument based on facts and verifiable truths, despite the demonstrated immunity of our opposition.

I appreciate your offer to lend reinforcements, such as Comrade Stoid, but agree with Comrade Gore that she is better employed in her speciality, i.e., the subversion of America’s youth and the pollution of thier precious bodily fluids.

I submit we should assume our fall-back position: rather than press our “America Sucks!” campaign in the lower and middle schools, we should wait until these innocent youths arrive on college campus, where, Comrade Wellstone assures us, the environment is more conducive to propoganda techniques that favor the Struggle.

On another note: I cannot look with favor on your proposal to liquidate the Dupe Bill, or, as you put it, “that damn horn-dog”. As the Vince Foster case illustrates, you are not gifted in such “wet work”, and “putting a .30/30. into his sex crazed brain pan” might well prove to be counterproductive. I recommend we stick to the previous plan, and wait for an STD to disable him.

Yours in Revolution

Comrade elucidator
Commisar for SDMB subversion.

97

Thanks, elucidator, for injecting some more levity into this orgiastic witch burning. It’s wasted, though.

And, apparently, like my own efforts, it’s damaging to the True Scotsma— er, True Progressive’s Cause. Apparently, we must pursue other tactics, abandoning the ineffective approaches of reason and open discussion for the more persuasive methods of strident flag-wrapping and scapegoating. We must avoid encouraging children to think about world affairs; this only leads to a dangerous openness to extraneous emotions and to concepts which detract from the proper patriotic outrage and thirst for righteous vengance.

Thanks to Jackanape, the veil of liberal claptrapitude has been lifted from mine eyes, and you see me now a changed man, poised to follow my likeminded Brethren of Ignorance into a proud era of Unthinking Reaction and Unreflective Response, as any Good Murriken should.

Up with America! Down with knowledge! Up with America!

98

Least he ain’t no damn Yurpeen!

99

You’ve got to try reason and open discussion before you can be said to have abandoned it.

Hoist those straw men on high and shout loudly; it’s more important to rally the True Believers than to be effective.

elucidator, katy-bar-the-door if I don’t think you’re getting to be one funny dude. At least if one equates incoherence with humor. :stuck_out_tongue:

100

RTFirefly, I just want to say that was a first class shellacking you gave the OP. Excellent debate, my man. Excellent.