See thats whats funny. Anyone who protests against Bush is called a liberal pansy. That Sheehan lady or whatever. Yeah, k, nut job in the public eye who should go away. But when she protests people like you go "OMG LIBERAL PANSY!" and yet when I say something you go "Oh go protest" but if I did protest, you'd call me a liberal pansy.

What a bunch of idiot kids. I bet 90% of them were just like "Yeah man, an excuse to ditch class!" and the other 10% are full of fresh "opinions" spoon fed from daddy. A teacher got caught breaking the rules, and basically got a slap on the wrist. My god what a bunch of impressionable morons. I dont even understand why they are protesting.

maybe they like the teacher?

It really is the hip and cool thing to bash Bush. All the celebrities are doing it. All the young people are doing it. MTV is doing it. I'm with Dash_rendar. I bet you it was a large chunk of the those 100 who ditched class because it was a good excuse. Slap a microphone to any random one and I'll put $5 on the table to say that the first victim will say "Uhh...well...Bush is bad...he's like...Hitler." The remaining few actually do pay a miniscule amount of attention to national politics but still they bash Bush because call the cool kids do it and I wanna be cool too! ****, I bet even Freelancer could show them all how much of a blockhead these 100 or so kids are.

To expect a teacher to be completely unbiased on politics is not only stupid, but unrealistic. Even if the teacher tries to be unbiased, there will be bias in what and how he teaches.

I liked how my senior year teacher taught class. He started the first day by saying he would attempt to be unbiased, but that he did favor Bush, and that all students should keep that in mind during the class, so that if he ever did go biased, the students would at least be able to recognize it as such.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]To expect a teacher to be completely unbiased on politics is not only stupid, but unrealistic. Even if the teacher tries to be unbiased, there will be bias in what and how he teaches.

I liked how my senior year teacher taught class. He started the first day by saying he would attempt to be unbiased, but that he did favor Bush, and that all students should keep that in mind during the class, so that if he ever did go biased, the students would at least be able to recognize it as such.[/QUOTE]

One of my profs did that. Tried to stay as neutral as possible, but let loose a few comments to clearly let us know where he really was.

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]To expect a teacher to be completely unbiased on politics is not only stupid, but unrealistic. Even if the teacher tries to be unbiased, there will be bias in what and how he teaches.

I liked how my senior year teacher taught class. He started the first day by saying he would attempt to be unbiased, but that he did favor Bush, and that all students should keep that in mind during the class, so that if he ever did go biased, the students would at least be able to recognize it as such.[/QUOTE]There's a difference between trying to be neutral by presenting fact and deliberately going against this principle by filling lectures with subjective rubbish.

I will concede that yes, it is unlikely a teacher will be able to reign in all of his opinionated rhetoric. However, teachers should express their bias by what facts they emphasize, not extraordinary claims without proof. Or they could even present the opinions of OTHER people. There are many easy ways to retain a neutral lecture.

Anyway, this is all assuming the teacher actually believes Bush is as bad as Hitler--unlikely. More likely, he is using hyperbole as a means to demonize someone he doesn't agree with. The use of bias all together aside, this particular sort of argumentation should be kept on talk radio and the internet, not classrooms.

That's a pretty random lie.

and stupid. who cares if people call you a liberal pansy? People will call you a coward if you don't do something about what you obviously strongly believe

Just because you're getting less back doesn't mean you're paying more taxes. How much is actually being withheld? If less is being withheld, there's not as much to get back. Have you actually done the math in how much tax you are actually paying, or is your whole argument based soley on hte size of your tax return?

I just read the whole thread. I'm pretty much calling bull**** on everything THRAWN has said....which are mostly absolute lies. Come on, at least make a slight effort to support your argument(lies).

[QUOTE=Cool Matty]To expect a teacher to be completely unbiased on politics is not only stupid, but unrealistic. Even if the teacher tries to be unbiased, there will be bias in what and how he teaches.

I liked how my senior year teacher taught class. He started the first day by saying he would attempt to be unbiased, but that he did favor Bush, and that all students should keep that in mind during the class, so that if he ever did go biased, the students would at least be able to recognize it as such.[/QUOTE]


My AP Government teacher was completely unbiased when teaching my class. She never told us what her political views were and never let on in class. She stuck to the facts.

I think your so emotionally caught up in politics that you draw parallels and jump to conclusions that no sane person would otherwise have come to. Also, you don't have a clue who Hitler was or what he was trying to accomplish.

Your confidence in me is flattering but possibly misplaced. I would've skipped simply because I didn't want to go to school, not to make a political statement or anything. Also, it's possible the teacher is a cool guy (rants aside) and his students are backing him because of that. The remaining students probably hopped on the bandwagon. My guess is that 90% of those students skipped for apolitical reasons.

Not really. The Nazis just printed money after money and adjusted the prices so that the inflation wouldn't be noticed. By 1943 the Reichsmark was internationaly worthless.
Yes, everyone had work. But only because Hitler built Autobahn after Autobahn and other warmachinery. The Nazis used the Blitzkrieg to gain new teritory and resources as fast as possible but they couldn't get enough resources to finance a Luftwaffe that could rival Britain's.

Cite.

For everyone who says the teacher shouldn't have gone off in that direction during class, thats a load of crap. Teaching isn't totally about ritually sticking to the syllabus. I learnt lots of things which developed from people asking slightly off topic questions which led on to off topic (in some cases extremely off topic) discussions for maybe 5 minutes and then the teacher would bring it back on topic.

If the teacher was just using the classroom as a way to vent out whatever it was he didn't like about Bush etc then yes that is wrong. However I very much doubt the class would have walked out if this was the case. He was obviously a good teacher and they liked him for it.

When George Bush murders 6 Million Jews, then you can compare him to Hitler. In the mean time, think about what you're saying.

What about the 5 million other people that died in german camps? Why do people only remember the Jews and not the gypsies (ever wondered where the term "I got gyped" came from?), homosexuals, catholics, etc etc...

So what? We already were 5 or 6 trillion the hole. We've not had a national surplus in over 65 years. Tax cuts help the economy and (eventually) will lead to more government income. But, it doesn't matter if no-one in the government is willing to trim spending. We might as well do away with taxes. It's retarded and so is Bush for increasing the budget like that, but it's not like Clinton had paid off the deficit or anything.




The Luftwaffe was way better than the RAF. Hitler just had one of his strokes of retarded and wasted it.

Because we can all agree that the latter are bad people!






(This is for those of you, who are too stupid to pick up on sarcasm. You're idiots. It was sarcasm.)

I'm surprised 'I got japped' isn't a phrase.

Why? Germans in camps in the U.S. were treated far worse than the Japanese. At least people regret putting the Japanese there.

Yeah well, the current 'war' isn't exactly as strenuous as most of the past wars we've fought. Just be glad you don't have to ration your precious gasoline, food, and metal like we did in WWII.

It's not often that someone gets accidentally sneak attacked.

Stuff gets stolen all the time.





German POWs? They were treated like royalty (relatively) in (most of) our camps.

Eh? German POWs in the US had it soft. They were treated better than blacks by far. They were in minimum security "prisons" and were let out on the weekends, under guard, to go to the movies and so on. After the war, many of them got to stay in the US.

Listening to any kind of political rant would be better than the high school education I'm getting. So far in three weeks of American Government class i have watched Air Force One, The Patriot and National Treasure.

Hell, if we had a sytem where students were presented with a variety of political opinions and ideas they might actually have to think for themselves to decide which one they agree with.

No, not German POWs. German civilians. Yeah, we put them in camps, just like we did with the Japanese. Your highschool history book doesn't mention this though, just pounds in the guilt for putting Japanese there.

Well the difference there is that we weren't trying to slaughter them. We just didn't trust them. Comparing the holocaust with Japanese interment camps is just retarded.

Ah. A lot of Germans Americanized durring both WWs to avoid stuff like that.

Yeah. It is. Which is why I didn't compair them in the first place...

My attention was recently direced towards this thread. All I can say is....well pretty much just wow. I read and hear alot of Anti Bush rhetoric, but this comes pretty close to being the worst. I mean yeah the man is way off from being a great president, but sweet god, the man is not genocide crazy. Just wow.

JEW ZIONIST CONSPIRACY

(you know, the one that's responsible for September 11)

I didn't either (zounds!)

If comparing Bush to Hitler can get some one fired, my entire school staff would be unemployed.

Yeah, I highly doubt your taxes really went up (Lets look at all the facts like a user said above. Did you change your W-2 - meaning they take out less so your refund is less so you think you pay more, etc)

All the 'low-income' people complaining about how the tax cuts are for the rich - get a clue. The tax is already progressive (up to 35%) for individuals, and they already pay a huge percentage of the total money that comes from taxes. To get a tax cut - YOU HAVE TO PAY TAXES. So since the rich pay more taxes, a tax cut will probably affect them the most.

All these morons want their taxes cut yet they're in the lowest tax bracket. They just can't grasp that relation there. It's not them favoring the rich, its because they truely pay a ton less proportionately compared to the 'high-income' people.

I'm all for a flat tax - have everyone charged the same percentage of their income.

Also, as a devil's advocate, I wish the rich people would complain about tax credits. The low-middle income people have bunches of tax credits to claim, while the rich cannot because most of them phase out once your AGI is over a certain amount.

The rich got a tax cut - people ***** about it.

New tax credits proposed - you don't hear a thing even though its phased out for higher income people.

The system tries to be fair, but really - with everyone's opinions, point-of-view, etc, it's impossible.

If you don't like your taxes now, then don't try to make a lot of money when you get older. Then you will truely hate the progressive tax system with a passion.

.

It's funny that a Finn would say that, since they were loosely allied with the Nazis in WWII...

Not really. That just really, really hated Russia more.

That's why he said loosley...

Or owever you kids spell it these day.s