underworld Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 racist bastards On other matters, the board introduced a resolution that makes race a factor in deciding what school a child will attend starting with the 2008-09 school year. No action was taken. link Quote
catbirdseat Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 That's total bullshit. If you want an all volunteer armed forces, you need programs like this. Do they think we can get by without an army? Do they think you can have an army and no draft when you hamstring the ability to recruit. You can't have it both ways. It's not the military's fault that it has been misused by Bush and Company. Don't take it out on them. Quote
cj001f Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 What part of no action was taken don't you get? Quote
underworld Posted November 15, 2006 Author Posted November 15, 2006 what part of "the board introduced a resolution that makes race a factor in deciding what school a child will attend" don't you get? Quote
cj001f Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 what part of "the board introduced a resolution that makes race a factor in deciding what school a child will attend" don't you get? Uh, the part where I give a fuck about stupid resolutions that haven't been enacted and are mostly political grandstanding? You don't know much about SF racial demographics do you? The white boys will probably be bettered by it Quote
underworld Posted November 15, 2006 Author Posted November 15, 2006 whether it was enacted or not - the proposing of a resolution like that makes the proposers dipshits. nope - i don't know about the demographics of SF...do i need to in order to think this is a BS resolution. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 totally racialist. I believe fat people should be inducted into the military. I guess I'm a weighcist. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 whether it was enacted or not - the proposing of a resolution like that makes the proposers dipshits. nope - i don't know about the demographics of SF...do i need to in order to think this is a BS resolution. You've never had a bad idea? Perhaps this is only one of the dipshit's ideas out of many, some of which you might actually agree with. Hard to say unless you track all of their proposals rather than this one snapshot. Quote
counterfeitfake Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 What??? I dare you to make sense. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 What??? I dare you to make sense. Call me Master of the Obvious Quote
cj001f Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 whether it was enacted or not - the proposing of a resolution like that makes the proposers dipshits. I'd take this opportunity to dig up all the dipshit conservative proposals, but I'm feeling charitable SF is attempting to improve the success of their students - complete and utter bullshit Quote
rbw1966 Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 That's total bullshit. If you want an all volunteer armed forces, you need programs like this. Do they think we can get by without an army? Do they think you can have an army and no draft when you hamstring the ability to recruit. You can't have it both ways. It's not the military's fault that it has been misused by Bush and Company. Don't take it out on them. You don't "need" JROTC to have an all-volunteer army. Dismantling the JROTC program will not hamstring recruiting abilities. As a matter of fact, I recall seeing in the paper that the military had actually exceeded its 2006 recruiting goals. I do agree that dismantling this program is BS. Quote
underworld Posted November 15, 2006 Author Posted November 15, 2006 whether it was enacted or not - the proposing of a resolution like that makes the proposers dipshits. I'd take this opportunity to dig up all the dipshit conservative proposals, but I'm feeling charitable SF is attempting to improve the success of their students - complete and utter bullshit the point is that SF prides itself in being progressive. progressive is supposed to not descriminate based on race... yet they propose this point blank descrimination based on race. Quote
cj001f Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 whether it was enacted or not - the proposing of a resolution like that makes the proposers dipshits. I'd take this opportunity to dig up all the dipshit conservative proposals, but I'm feeling charitable SF is attempting to improve the success of their students - complete and utter bullshit the point is that SF prides itself in being progressive. progressive is supposed to not descriminate based on race... yet they propose this point blank descrimination based on race. I thought the point was the usual band wagon San Francisco bashing by people who don't know anything about it's problems or what they are trying to fix? Quote
underworld Posted November 15, 2006 Author Posted November 15, 2006 Mr. san fran.... please enlighten us. what problem(s) are they trying to fix? Quote
cj001f Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 they are trying to make sure no child is left behind Quote
ClimbingPanther Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 Their position was summed up by a former teacher, Nancy Mancias, who said, "We need to teach a curriculum of peace." Stupid idealist pig. Doesn't she know anything? Ignorance is Strength War is Peace Freedom is Slavery -Ivan Quote
minx Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 racist bastards On other matters, the board introduced a resolution that makes race a factor in deciding what school a child will attend starting with the 2008-09 school year. No action was taken. link didn't they try this in the seattle schools? or was that based on income/neighborhood? i seem to recall the district getting sued over and over by the parents of kids who were being bussed away from their neighborhood schools. ?? Quote
Weekend_Climberz Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 As a matter of fact, I recall seeing in the paper that the military had actually exceeded its 2006 recruiting goals. That's because they raised the allowable age and now their recruiting I think (don't quote me now) 18-45. Somebody else probably has the exact numbers, but I remember them raising the age like 10 years or something. Do you want this guy out there flying jets: Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 the point is that SF prides itself in being progressive. progressive is supposed to not descriminate based on race... yet they propose this point blank descrimination based on race. It sooths their collective white guilt. It was a proposal by one person that was shot down. There's no 'they' here. Desegregation is cool if it's limited to allowing students of all races to attend any given school. Busing, however, aside from not following the principle of color blindness, is a way to postpone or avoid fixing shitty schools. Quote
tvashtarkatena Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 [quote Do you want this guy out there flying jets: Into a cliff, yes. Quote
ClimbingPanther Posted November 15, 2006 Posted November 15, 2006 This just in: "After receiving a large number of complaints from across the country regarding their plans to make race a factor in children's school placement, the San Francisco School Board has scrapped the proposed plan. Instead, they have successfully lobbied the state legislature to circumvent this problem. All California residents are to be removed from their current homes and redistributed homogeneously based on their race and income level. Assuming some opposition is to be expected, the board is prepared if necessary to lobby the federal government to take action to homogenize the entire U.S. society." -Some News Source on the Web Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.