Bill Encourages Schools To Teach About Racial Significance Of Obama’s Presidency

[j-mac]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A bill that passed the Assembly with unanimous bipartisan support Thursday encourages California schools to teach students about the racial significance of Barack Obama’s presidency.The Assembly approved AB1912 with a 71-0 vote and no debate or discussion. It now heads to the state Senate.
The bill by Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, asks state education officials to include Obama’s election in history and social studies standards laying out what students are expected to learn.
High school history students already learn about recent presidents. But Holden says lessons about Obama also should focus on what his election meant for racial equality and civil rights.

Bill Encourages Schools To Teach About Racial Significance Of Obama’s Presidency « CBS Sacramento

Ok, First, the obvious egregiousness of a bill passed with "No debate, or discussion" should offend all of us. Second, that not only should the standard of educating on previous Presidents and their times in office, usually based on achievements, is scrapped with this one (because there isn't any), but to codify this in law, as a mandate to protect Obama at any possible negativity concerning his Presidency, and shield him from scrutiny by only being able to say what a great thing that he was the first black President, is laughable, and pathetic at the same time....

What a loser Obama is that he actually will leave office with a legacy of destruction.

 

[ChezC3]

SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A bill that passed the Assembly with unanimous bipartisan support Thursday encourages California schools to teach students about the racial significance of Barack Obama’s presidency.

The Assembly approved AB1912 with a 71-0 vote and no debate or discussion. It now heads to the state Senate.

The bill by Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, asks state education officials to include Obama’s election in history and social studies standards laying out what students are expected to learn.

Bill Encourages Schools To Teach About Racial Significance Of Obama’s Presidency « CBS Sacramento

There is a word for government-led curriculum.


Propaganda.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Bill Encourages Schools To Teach About Racial Significance Of Obama’s Presidency « CBS Sacramento

There is a word for government-led curriculum.


Propaganda.

The politically correct term is public education.

 

[KevinKohler]

In the scope of US history, having a black president mere decades following segregation, no voting rights, etc...is racially significant.

 

[ChezC3]

The politically correct term is public education.

Well aren't you a thesaurus this morning...

 

[Tralfamadore]

Ok, First, the obvious egregiousness of a bill passed with "No debate, or discussion" should offend all of us. Second, that not only should the standard of educating on previous Presidents and their times in office, usually based on achievements, is scrapped with this one (because there isn't any), but to codify this in law, as a mandate to protect Obama at any possible negativity concerning his Presidency, and shield him from scrutiny by only being able to say what a great thing that he was the first black President, is laughable, and pathetic at the same time....

What a loser Obama is that he actually will leave office with a legacy of destruction.

Teaching about the significance of Obama being first black president protects any possible negativity concerning him? WTF?

He's the first black president. Any person with a basic grasp of United States history knows that fact is significant.

 

[tres borrachos]

I thought we were going to be a post-racial society?

The bill says the election was a “historic step in the effort towards equality in the United States” .

Huh? Huge "step"?

and that previous elections in the nation involved intimidation and physical violence that prevented millions of African-Americans from voting. It also commends Obama for his work as a community organizer who registered voters after he graduated from Harvard Law School

This is what they teach high schoolers in CA? The same kids who can't spell cat when they graduate?

 

[a351]

In the scope of US history, having a black president mere decades following segregation, no voting rights, etc...is racially significant.

**** out of here with that logic.

 

[StillBallin75]

Moderator's Warning:

Threads merged.

 

[Deuce]

I thought we were going to be a post-racial society?

The bill says the election was a “historic step in the effort towards equality in the United States” .

Huh? Huge "step"?

and that previous elections in the nation involved intimidation and physical violence that prevented millions of African-Americans from voting. It also commends Obama for his work as a community organizer who registered voters after he graduated from Harvard Law School

This is what they teach high schoolers in CA? The same kids who can't spell cat when they graduate?

Which of these two statements do you disagree with?

 

[tres borrachos]

Which of these two statements do you disagree with?

We had equality before he was elected, which is why he was elected. If we didn't, like in the 1930s, he wouldn't have been elected.

Blacks were given the vote when?

 

[Deuce]

Ok, First, the obvious egregiousness of a bill passed with "No debate, or discussion" should offend all of us. Second, that not only should the standard of educating on previous Presidents and their times in office, usually based on achievements, is scrapped with this one (because there isn't any), but to codify this in law, as a mandate to protect Obama at any possible negativity concerning his Presidency, and shield him from scrutiny by only being able to say what a great thing that he was the first black President, is laughable, and pathetic at the same time....

What a loser Obama is that he actually will leave office with a legacy of destruction.

It doesn't mandate anything. Does that change your opinion at all?

 

[Tralfamadore]

I thought we were going to be a post-racial society?

I don't think being a post-racial society means we should ignore huge chunks of history and downplay the significance of certain events.

Should we not teach about Jackie Robinson either?

 

[a351]

I thought we were going to be a post-racial society?

We aren't. Race relations have improved significantly in recent years. This is merely symbolic of that fact.

The bill says the election was a “historic step in the effort towards equality in the United States” .

Huh? Huge "step"?

Sure. What's problematic about that statement?

and that previous elections in the nation involved intimidation and physical violence that prevented millions of African-Americans from voting. It also commends Obama for his work as a community organizer who registered voters after he graduated from Harvard Law School

This is what they teach high schoolers in CA? The same kids who can't spell cat when they graduate?

Again, what possible gripe do you have with that statement? It seems the notion that Obama will be viewed as anything other than sinister just isn't good enough for some.

 

[1750Texan]

We had equality before he was elected, which is why he was elected. If we didn't, like in the 1930s, he wouldn't have been elected.

Blacks were given the vote when?

African Americans always had the right to vote...it was affirmend by the constitution by the 15th amendment. No right can be granted...

 

[Deuce]

We had equality before he was elected, which is why he was elected. If we didn't, like in the 1930s, he wouldn't have been elected.

:lamo

Blacks were given the vote when?

:lamo

We did not have equality before, nor do we have equality now. And the fact that black people were able to vote for longer doesn't mean attempts to suppress the black vote didn't continue to happen. By the way, they still continue to happen.

Conservatives talk about equal opportunity instead of equal outcomes so often they've actually convinced themselves we have the first one. :lamo

 

[tres borrachos]

We aren't. Race relations have improved significantly in recent years. This is merely symbolic of that fact.



Sure. What's problematic about that statement?



Again, what possible gripe do you have with that statement? It seems the notion that Obama will be viewed as anything other than sinister just isn't good enough for some.

The opposite of intimidation and violence in decades past has nothing to do with Obama being sinister. I have no idea why you even said that.

 

[tres borrachos]

:lamo



:lamo

We did not have equality before, nor do we have equality now. And the fact that black people were able to vote for longer doesn't mean attempts to suppress the black vote didn't continue to happen. By the way, they still continue to happen.

Conservatives talk about equal opportunity instead of equal outcomes so often they've actually convinced themselves we have the first one. :lamo

So you're saying Obama didn't have an opportunity to be President? Then how did he get the job? Did someone buy it for him?

 

[tres borrachos]

I don't think being a post-racial society means we should ignore huge chunks of history and downplay the significance of certain events.

Should we not teach about Jackie Robinson either?

My kids were never taught about the suffragette movement in school. Damn shame, too. Nor were they taught about what FDR did to the people of Asian descent. Another damn shame. I was taught about the significance of Kennedy being the first Catholic President in school. My kids weren't. I suppose this is just what's "en vogue" to be taught in schools these days.

 

[a351]

The opposite of intimidation and violence in decades past has nothing to do with Obama being sinister. I have no idea why you even said that.

The text merely cited the fact that intimidation and violence was used in order to suppress the black vote, and commended Obama for his work as a community organizer. I'm struggling to see why one would take issue with either statement.

 

[KevinKohler]

**** out of here with that logic.

So you're saying it's not historically significant?

 

[tres borrachos]

The text merely cited the fact that intimidation and violence was used in order to suppress the black vote, and commended Obama for his work as a community organizer. I'm struggling to see why one would take issue with either statement.

And meanwhile, kids who graduate from high school don't know what happened on Lexington Green.

I would like to see them teach the kids in California how anyone can succeed in today's America if you work hard. Obama didn't get elected because of his race, did he?

 

[a351]

So you're saying it's not historically significant?

'Twas sarcasm. It's obviously an historically significant event. The OP isn't exactly friendly to that sort of logic though, it gets in the way of his partisan bitchfest.

 

[a351]

And meanwhile, kids who graduate from high school don't know what happened on Lexington Green.

LOL what? They don't teach about the Revolution anymore? According to whom exactly? Irrelevant nonetheless, unless you think the two narratives can't coexist in one textbook.

I would like to see them teach the kids in California how anyone can succeed in today's America if you work hard.

Who says they don't?

Obama didn't get elected because of his race, did he?

Who says he did? Just more off-topic rambling.

 

[KevinKohler]

And meanwhile, kids who graduate from high school don't know what happened on Lexington Green.

I would like to see them teach the kids in California how anyone can succeed in today's America if you work hard. Obama didn't get elected because of his race, did he?

You can't teach anyone how to succeed at anything. If there was a specific formula, we'd all be following it, and we'd all be successful. Sound silly? That's because it is, as a concept.