Funny events in anti-woke world

[Buyetyen]

So why are some teachers seeing it as reason to teach push the idea of extra credit for attending AntiFa organised events or on about how they talk to their class of 3 and 4 year olds about how all white people are white supremacists?

Literally nobody is doing that, so it's okay. You make shit up, dude.

 

[AnxietyProne]

Because you made it up

Keep in mind that, to conservatives, teaching about Martin Luther King at all is "Critical Race Theory"

 

[McElroy]

How do you know it's trolls or a rape joke?

It's a humorous take on rape. Like this comment by cumdustmer:

"As a woman i know rape is okay... If any men rape me ill let them we are servents to me and we just know it. By now its the only reason we were made was to be maids to men... Rape isnt so bad anyway i need 3 more words "

edit: And the more verbose comments that look half sane at first glance are the trolling part.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

I'd like to ask every one of those people to even define CRT cathode ray tube, duh. Not one of them even knows.

All they know have been told by Fox News is that it is an evil curriculum which will teach children that white people are something other than inherently superior and awesome.

 

[Gergar12]

We about to die because these two fascists can't keep their hands off other countries.

 

[Kwak]

So you're arguing there literally aren't teachers taking the idea of CRT curriculum as an excuse to teach some rather exaggerated claims and push activist causes and ideologies that may not always align with reality very well?

Point to where in his post he used the words 'literally' , 'teachers', or 'curriculum'.

 

[Seanchaidh]

We about to die because these two fascists can't keep their hands off other countries.

That is precisely the narrative the State Department is trying to get you to believe. Presumably nothing of importance will happen and everyone will forget about it.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Point to where in his post he used the words 'literally' , 'teachers', or 'curriculum'.

Well considering the argument is about Teachers and the Curriculum at present I'd rather like to know if he was talking about dunk hunters what relevance that has to the teaching of CRT in school or are you thinking maybe that he argument is about teaching CRT at schools teaching duck hunting?

The idea that it's fearmongering suggests none of the claimed kind of stuff is going on yet there's plenty of videos online of teachers on about how they're teaching their classes of junior school kids all kinds of stuff according to their videos about how the whole USA and system is racist and sexist.

Because you made it up

You really going to make me find it and post it?

Simply put, they aren't. CRT is not a real thing outside of university, and even then, not a thing outside of specific contexts.

The concept of course can be applied when looking at how we teach history at any level. For example, looking back on my own education, I can say that while it certainly wasn't all roses and butterflies and white people--especially white Americans--can do no wrong, there were certainly things left out which should not have been.

I think that would apply to most countries histories black or white.

1. They're not using CRT as a reason.
2. Attending various organized marches/events can be extremely beneficial learning experiences (provided the proper background knowledge is given first). As a high schooler, I attended a ceremony at a Hindu temple and a sabbath service at a Jewish temple for my World Religions class. My nun teacher at my Catholic high school was certainly not attempting to convert us to Hinduism or Judaism. The events were, however, invaluable in providing insights into how and why people of various faiths practice their traditions beyond my personal religious upbringing. This is, of course, assuming you aren't simply making shit up...
3. I'm going to guess that you read somewhere about children being taught the concept of implicit biases and, in either ignorance or malice, have twisted it to that. Knowing one's implicit biases is an important part of being an adult. It allows you to compensate for them and allow open and honest interaction with others. You might try it.

1. They're kind of are or at least using it as a cloak to hide said actions under.
2. Religious ceremonies to help understand different religious are a but different to activist marches.
3. Because implicit bias totally hasn't been used against people in one way or another. It's not like implicit bias is twisted by others to claimed "All White people are racist so you need to make amends, buy my $50 a month reparations box" or similar kind of stuff.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Literally nobody is doing that, so it's okay. You make shit up, dude.

Look I could spend time finding it and posting it for you to play the same semantic argument but are you really going to push me on this one because we both know I'll deliver then you'll try to find a way to argue and reject it.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

We about to die because these two fascists can't keep their hands off other countries.

Cool at least that's a way out of the pandemic coming then.

 

[tstorm823]

Republicans keep screaming about voter fraud, yet every time we find voter fraud, it's Republicans who have been doing it.

No, that's just every time you hear about it. Fraud is not partisan, it exists across the spectrum. If you think it is primarily on one side, that is a only a failure of your news feed.

 

[TheMysteriousGX]

No, that's just every time you hear about it. Fraud is not partisan, it exists across the spectrum. If you think it is primarily on one side, that is a only a failure of your news feed.

Maybe. But I know that if "democrat" and "criminal charges for voter fraud" ever shared a headline, the conservative morons on Twitter wouldn't shut up about it.

They're all screaming their fucking heads off at a Democrat kind-of-but-not-really "doctoring" text messages.

Of fucking course I'd see criminal charges for fraud if it were democrats

 

[XsjadoBlayde]

Well considering the argument is about Teachers and the Curriculum at present I'd rather like to know if he was talking about dunk hunters what relevance that has to the teaching of CRT in school or are you thinking maybe that he argument is about teaching CRT at schools teaching duck hunting?

The idea that it's fearmongering suggests none of the claimed kind of stuff is going on yet there's plenty of videos online of teachers on about how they're teaching their classes of junior school kids all kinds of stuff according to their videos about how the whole USA and system is racist and sexist.


You really going to make me find it and post it?




I think that would apply to most countries histories black or white.



1. They're kind of are or at least using it as a cloak to hide said actions under.
2. Religious ceremonies to help understand different religious are a but different to activist marches.
3. Because implicit bias totally hasn't been used against people in one way or another. It's not like implicit bias is twisted by others to claimed "All White people are racist so you need to make amends, buy my $50 a month reparations box" or similar kind of stuff.

Lol.

Reminds me of a recent article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/15/project-veritas-fundraising-voter-fraud/

Two days after the 2020 election, as President Donald Trump raised alarm about mass voter fraud, Project Veritas produced a video it claimed furnished stunning proof.

The organization, which has used deceptive tactics in attempts to expose alleged wrongdoing by journalists, liberals and labor unions, aired accusations from a Pennsylvania postal worker who said his supervisors had tampered with mail-in ballots. The video was cited in right-wing media and by a top Republican lawmaker.

Then the claims fell apart: The worker recanted to federal agents. But as its high-profile investigation was being debunked, Project Veritas was concluding a banner year for fundraising.

The organization nearly doubled its revenue last year, according to a recent public filing. Project Veritas, led by James O’Keefe, raised about $22 million in 2020, compared with $12 million in 2019, the tax filing shows.

O’Keefe earned a salary of $412,000 from the group, whose methods have drawn scrutiny from federal law enforcement. The FBI last month searched two locations associated with Project Veritas as part of an investigation into how a diary reportedly belonging to President Biden’s daughter, Ashley, became public just before the 2020 election. O’Keefe, 37, said his group acquired the diary lawfully and did not publish it because its authenticity could not be confirmed.

The fundraising boom shows how Project Veritas has capitalized on confrontational tactics and baseless claims of election fraud — both increasingly mainstream in the Republican Party. With expanded resources, it’s seeking to press its case in Washington, recently hiring its first lobbyist, an ex-aide to former vice president Mike Pence, to inform lawmakers about its interactions with the FBI, according to a filing.

An attorney for Project Veritas did not respond to a request for comment, but O’Keefe, in a statement reacting to the FBI action, defended his methods as newsgathering and said: “It appears journalism itself may now be on trial.”

This October, a federal judge ruled in an unrelated civil action that Project Veritas could present itself in such a light but that the group’s opponents could characterize it differently — as a “political spying operation.” The judge affirmed that the jury would decide “which characterization it finds most persuasive.”

Because Project Veritas is set up as a 501(c)3 charitable organization, it is exempt from disclosing its donors or paying federal income tax. In return, it is supposed to abstain from campaign activity.

Details of its financing, however, can be glimpsed in separate disclosures by its benefactors. More than a quarter of its revenue last year came from the Bradley Impact Fund, a donor-advised conservative philanthropy based in Milwaukee, according to a tax filing by that group. The fund gave Project Veritas a grant of $6.5 million — Bradley’s largest expenditure last year and far more than it has provided to Project Veritas in all other years since 2012 combined, according to a review of its disclosures.


Christine Czernejewski, a spokeswoman for the Bradley Impact Fund, declined to comment on the Project Veritas grant but wrote in an email that the nonprofit’s principles include “a belief in Constitutional order, free markets, a strong civil society, informed citizens, and donor intent.”

The grant from the Bradley Impact Fund was identified by the watchdog group Documented and confirmed by The Washington Post through public filings.

Beyond the Bradley Impact Fund, it’s not fully clear which other benefactors accounted for the rise in Project Veritas’s revenue. But smaller sums have come from a range of philanthropies.

DonorsTrust, another prominent donor-advised fund that allows its contributors to remain anonymous, gave just over $1 million to the group, according to its 2020 tax filing.

The Gardner Grout Foundation, a Reno-based philanthropy that lists no mission statement or employees on its tax filings, contributed $325,000 last year to Project Veritas, more than three times the amount it gave the year before.


And $15,000 recently flowed into Project Veritas’s coffers from a little-known Arizona-based philanthropy called the Immanuel Charitable Foundation, which also distributed funds in the fiscal year ending September 2020 to groups as disparate as the Midwest Innocence Project, a nonprofit seeking to address wrongful convictions, and True the Vote, a Houston-based group promising to expose election fraud.

In response to a question about whether the fund would continue to support Project Veritas after the FBI searches, a spokesman for DonorsTrust pointed to a statement from Lawson Bader, the group’s president and CEO, saying that donors may back charities “in good standing with and approved by the IRS … If at any point this status is revoked, entities will no longer be eligible for contributions from DonorsTrust or any other donor-advised fund.” The person listed as the Immanuel Charitable Foundation’s president on tax filings did not respond to telephone messages. The Gardner Grout Foundation could not be reached for comment.

O’Keefe, in a deposition taken last year as part of a lawsuit filed by the Michigan branch of the American Federation of Teachers against Project Veritas, said the group’s financing came from “many individuals, some foundations.” He said Project Veritas maintains a mailing list of donors and has purchased email addresses from third-party vendors for the purpose of soliciting donations.


Project Veritas has at times faced regulatory hurdles to fundraising in some states based on alleged misstatements or failure to disclose O’Keefe’s criminal record. In 2017, officials in Florida barred O’Keefe from personally seeking donations in the state because of a 2010 conviction for entering a federal building under false pretenses. O’Keefe pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor charge after posing as a telephone repairman to gain entry to the office of then-Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.).

Despite these setbacks, O’Keefe and his methods have been embraced by Trump and his family. The Trump Foundation gave $20,000 to Project Veritas in 2015, according to tax filings, the same year he embarked on his campaign for president. In a book published in 2018, O’Keefe wrote that Trump had asked him, during a meeting in 2013, if he could “get inside” Columbia University to access President Barack Obama’s college records. Trump, wrote O’Keefe, “suspected Obama had presented himself as a foreign student on application materials.”

Donald Trump Jr., the former president’s eldest son, has repeatedly promoted Project Veritas investigations, at one point writing on Twitter, in response to a user who had called him a liar, “look at project Veritas videos.”


Trump spokeswoman Liz Harrington did not respond to questions about the family’s past support for O’Keefe but criticized the FBI for its searches of properties associated with the group.

The Bradley Impact Fund is part of a network of Milwaukee-based conservative nonprofits that has focused on issues similar to those featured in Project Veritas videos. The Bradley Impact Fund is linked — including through a shared address and overlapping leadership — to the better-known Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, which has served as a key funder of conservative causes in Wisconsin and nationally. It has reported assets of more than $900 million.

In recent years, the Bradley Foundation has given to numerous organizations pressing for voting restrictions and, since last year, backing Trump’s baseless warnings about mass voter fraud. The foundation’s board includes Cleta Mitchell, a prominent Republican attorney involved in unsuccessful efforts to challenge Biden’s win. Mitchell declined to comment.

In a statement contesting a recent New Yorker article — which cast the foundation as “an extraordinary force in persuading mainstream Republicans to support radical challenges to election rules” — its leaders said “Bradley made only $500,000 in grants to groups doing election integrity work” in 2020. Project Veritas, recipient of $6.5 million from the associated Bradley Impact Fund, has for years sought to accuse Democrats of election manipulation.

Project Veritas’s election-related work intensified last year as Trump made baseless claims of fraud the centerpiece of his campaign, and O’Keefe’s group produced what it said was evidence — including the allegations, later recanted, that postal officials had been overheard discussing a plan to backdate mail ballots. The Pennsylvania postal worker whose claims were cited by Project Veritas — and later by Sen. Lindsey O. Graham (R-S.C.) in a statement calling on the Justice Department to investigate — ultimately told U.S. Postal Service investigators that he had not actually overheard such a conversation. Project Veritas says the man was coerced into changing his account.

Some of the groups funded by the Bradley Foundation and the associated Bradley Fund — such as FreedomWorks, a libertarian advocacy group that helped fuel the tea party movement — have amplified findings by Project Veritas. A FreedomWorks spokesman declined to comment.


Another large contribution from the Bradley Impact Fund, a $2.5 million grant, went to the 85 Fund, a conservative nonprofit associated with Leonard Leo, the Trump confidant and stalwart of the Federalist Society. The donor-advised fund, which allows contributors to earmark money for certain causes while remaining anonymous, also gave to the Claremont Institute, the conservative think tank based in Upland, Calif., that employs John C. Eastman, a lawyer and architect of Trump’s failed strategy for overturning the results of the 2020 election.

 

[Buyetyen]

Look I could spend time finding it and posting it for you to play the same semantic argument but are you really going to push me on this one because we both know I'll deliver then you'll try to find a way to argue and reject it.

Yeah, exactly, you make shit up.

 

[Schadrach]

I'd like to ask every one of those people to even define CRT cathode ray tube, duh. Not one of them even knows.

It's just a boogeyman to the snowflake right.

When they pass "anti-CRT" bills, hey tend to call out pretty specific things they mean (the NH bill being one of the vaguest I've seen to date).

She turned the 3/5 comprise into a benefit, not a negative. You dont even have to call it racist to see that's an issue.

I'd argue it was unfortunate but necessary - without it either slave states would have utterly dominated the federal government or they wouldn't have joined at all (depending on whether or not slaves counted as population for purposes of House seats and electors), and neither would have been a good outcome for a young US.

Simply put, they aren't. CRT is not a real thing outside of university, and even then, not a thing outside of specific contexts.

Then you should take no issue with "anti-CRT" bills then, because the ones so far have generally banned things like trying to promote or instill collective guilt on the basis of race or the notion that a given race is inherently superior or inferior to other races. Which is not CRT, and therefore the big problem with anti-CRT bills is that they are poorly named?

 

[Hades]

Then you should take no issue with "anti-CRT" bills then, because the ones so far have generally banned things like trying to promote or instill collective guilt on the basis of race or the notion that a given race is inherently superior or inferior to other races. Which is not CRT, and therefore the big problem with anti-CRT bills is that they are poorly named?

But what is ''installing collective guild?'' and what isn't? Would it be installing collective guild to point out how slavery and racism affected American institutions? Those are just facts and I've been told facts don't care about people's feelings. And isn't it kind of a fact that America has some things it should perhaps feel kinda guilty about?

I'd argue it was unfortunate but necessary - without it either slave states would have utterly dominated the federal government or they wouldn't have joined at all (depending on whether or not slaves counted as population for purposes of House seats and electors), and neither would have been a good outcome for a young US.

The south essentially blackmailing the north like that doesn't reflect well on them for doing that, or on the north for caving. They could say they wouldn't have joined but what was the alternative? Remain with the British? Join Mexico?

 

[AnxietyProne]

It's a humorous take on rape. Like this comment by cumdustmer:
edit: And the more verbose comments that look half sane at first glance are the trolling part.

That's not proof. I've found plenty of examples of people who say that unironically.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

View attachment 5107

Lol.

Reminds me of a recent article.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/12/15/project-veritas-fundraising-voter-fraud/

High school teacher fired after praising antifa: ‘I have 180 days to turn them into revolutionaries’

A California teacher who brandished an antifa flag in his classroom was fired after a video was leaked of him praising the left-wing militant group.

news.yahoo.com

Well the channel it's on is the CBS13 youtube channel

Yeah, exactly, you make shit up.

No it's been show time and time again I don't lie. You just apparently have a blind spot and keep forgetting when I keep being called out on stuff then bring evidence.


not the project Veritas youtube channel so seems they acquired some of the footage etc.

 

[Buyetyen]

No it's been show time and time again I don't lie. You just apparently have a blind spot and keep forgetting when I keep being called out on stuff then bring evidence.

No, you make shit up.

 

[Avnger]

Then you should take no issue with "anti-CRT" bills then, because the ones so far have generally banned things like trying to promote or instill collective guilt on the basis of race or the notion that a given race is inherently superior or inferior to other races. Which is not CRT, and therefore the big problem with anti-CRT bills is that they are poorly named?

The problem is that such bills are written to white-wash (fitting....) history taught in schools. The notion of "instill collective guilt on the basis of race" could apply to almost any race-based event in the US. Because the "offense" is based not on the historical accuracy of what is taught but instead the feelings of the children, their parents, the school board, politicians, and random nobodies with an axe to grind in regards to the historical events.

What demographic made up the vast majority of slave-owners in the US and under what notions did they moralize and enforce slavery? How do you teach the history of the civil rights movement without getting into the systematic racial dynamics? How do you teach the topics of white flight, redlining, and the war on drugs? How do you teach about the genocide of native americans, the march of tears, or reservations?

A teacher doing something as simple as reading massively important primary-source documents like MLK's letter from the Birmingham jail could be construed as violating these laws.

Another issue is that several of these laws don't just censor the school curriculum, the literally provide provisions for making teachers individually liable on a civil basis for the "harms."

Edit:

Even more concerning is clauses in these bills banning the teaching of the very real concepts like implicit biases and institutional/systematic racism.

From Wisconsin Asssembly Bill 411:
(b) An individual, by virtue of the individual's race or sex, is inherently racist,
9sexist, or oppressive, whether consciously or unconsciously.

A very real psychological phenonium is being banned for hurting peoples' feelings...

And before you make up apologetics about how the bills aren't meant to be used this way, why don't we listen to what the politicians creating and voting for them are saying.

In testimony before an Assembly committee last month, Wichgers said the bill would ban the teaching of concepts including “Social Emotional Learning,” “Diversity, Equity and Inclusion,” culturally responsive teaching, anti-racism, conscious and unconscious bias, culturally responsive practices, diversity training, equity, microaggressions, multiculturalism, patriarchy, restorative justice, social justice, systemic racism, white privilege, white supremacy and “woke,” among others.

Wisconsin Assembly passes ban on teaching critical race theory

The bill, which passed the Assembly on a 60-38 party-line vote, is all but certain to be vetoed by Democratic Gov. Tony Evers, a former state schools superintendent.

madison.com