• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Everyone Likes Reading. Why Are We So Afraid of It?

I'm looking at education nation-wide, and from 1980 until 2023 the only course the US has taken in regard to education is downward. Thanks entirely to the illegal creation of the Department of Education by the Democratic Party. You want Americans to be illiterate, and especially with regard to civics. The less Americans know, the less likely they will be able to interfere with your leftist genocidal plans. So stop pretending otherwise, it only further demonstrates your hypocrisy.
Democrats are the party of education. Republicans want to keep people ignorant so labor is cheap. You think the Department of Education is illegal? Take it to court. Otherwise, that's a bad joke.

If you're looking at education nationwide, it's republican run states driving test scores down for the whole country. It's republicans like DeSantis taking books out of libraries and making teachers' lives impossible.

Go peddle that tired crap elsewither. I'm outa here.
 
Book bans, chatbots, pedagogical warfare: What it means to read has become a minefield.

But maybe the real problem is that children aren’t being taught to read at all. As test scores have slumped — a trend exacerbated by the disruptions of Covid — a long-smoldering conflict over teaching methods has flared anew. Parents, teachers and administrators have rebelled against widely used progressive approaches and demanded more emphasis on phonics. In May, David Banks, the chancellor of New York City’s public schools, for many years a stronghold of “whole language” instruction, announced a sharp pivot toward phonics, a major victory for the “science of reading” movement and a blow to devotees of entrenched “balanced literacy” methods.

The reading crisis reverberates at the higher reaches of the educational system too. As corporate management models and zealous state legislatures refashion the academy into a gated outpost of the gig economy, the humanities have lost their luster for undergraduates. According to reports in The New Yorker and elsewhere, fewer and fewer students are majoring in English, and many of those who do (along with their teachers) have turned away from canonical works of literature toward contemporary writing and pop culture. Is anyone reading “Paradise Lost” anymore? Are you?

This bothers me everyday. I Think about declining reading scores everyday.

Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works.
Carl Sagan

"To give to every citizen the information he needs...to understand his duties to his neighbors and country...to know his rights..."

- Thomas Jefferson, 1818

A college teacher will tell you that book banning is the default instinct of most modern teachers.
Look at the criticism of the 1619 Project , one of modern history's biggest lies.

"The historians John Thornton and Linda Heywood of Boston University estimate that 90 percent of those shipped to the New World were enslaved by Africans and then sold to European traders. The sad truth is that without complex business partnerships between African elites and European traders and commercial agents, the slave trade to the New World would have been impossible, at least on the scale it occurred."

There, the destruction of the premise that racism starts when the first white foot alights upon Jamestown
 
Democrats are the party of education. Republicans want to keep people ignorant so labor is cheap. You think the Department of Education is illegal? Take it to court. Otherwise, that's a bad joke.

If you're looking at education nationwide, it's republican run states driving test scores down for the whole country. It's republicans like DeSantis taking books out of libraries and making teachers' lives impossible.

Go peddle that tired crap elsewither. I'm outa here.
I love pointing out stupid lazy people

Folks, the Dept of Education being dismantled is up for discussion BY THE DEPT OF EDUCATION SECY .

Betsy DeVos calls for abolishing the Department of Education​


You thought it was only outsiders, "'that's a bad joke"
1712230576507.webp
 
Book bans, chatbots, pedagogical warfare: What it means to read has become a minefield.

But maybe the real problem is that children aren’t being taught to read at all. As test scores have slumped — a trend exacerbated by the disruptions of Covid — a long-smoldering conflict over teaching methods has flared anew. Parents, teachers and administrators have rebelled against widely used progressive approaches and demanded more emphasis on phonics. In May, David Banks, the chancellor of New York City’s public schools, for many years a stronghold of “whole language” instruction, announced a sharp pivot toward phonics, a major victory for the “science of reading” movement and a blow to devotees of entrenched “balanced literacy” methods.

The reading crisis reverberates at the higher reaches of the educational system too. As corporate management models and zealous state legislatures refashion the academy into a gated outpost of the gig economy, the humanities have lost their luster for undergraduates. According to reports in The New Yorker and elsewhere, fewer and fewer students are majoring in English, and many of those who do (along with their teachers) have turned away from canonical works of literature toward contemporary writing and pop culture. Is anyone reading “Paradise Lost” anymore? Are you?

This bothers me everyday. I Think about declining reading scores everyday.

Our species needs, and deserves, a citizenry with minds wide awake and a basic understanding of how the world works.
Carl Sagan

"To give to every citizen the information he needs...to understand his duties to his neighbors and country...to know his rights..."

- Thomas Jefferson, 1818

Which is it "everybody likes reading" OR "why are we so afraid of reading "

Yogi Berra

“Nobody goes to that restaurant anymore because it's too crowded.”​

― Yogi Berra
 
There, the destruction of the premise that racism starts when the first white foot alights upon Jamestown
It’s true that slavery was nearly universal in the world, until about a century or two ago. The attempt to justify slavery due to innate differences was nothing new either. Aristotle, 2300 years ago, argued that some people are innately and naturally designed to be slaves, and wouldn’t want to have it any other way, because they cannot think for themselves.

But the use of race as justification for slavery, based on supposedly fixed racial differences, was a uniquely European colonial idea.
 
I love pointing out stupid lazy people

Folks, the Dept of Education being dismantled is up for discussion BY THE DEPT OF EDUCATION SECY .

Betsy DeVos calls for abolishing the Department of Education​


You thought it was only outsiders, "'that's a bad joke"
View attachment 67502746
The Department of Education is unconstitutional and was created illegally by leftist filth. It should never had existed in the first place. The sooner it is completely abolished, the better.
 
The Department of Education is unconstitutional and was created illegally by leftist filth. It should never had existed in the first place. The sooner it is completely abolished, the better.

Maybe Crooked donnie trump will abolish it after he's reelected, and after he rolls out our great TrumpCare™ plans?

LOLOL!!! 😂 (y)
 
The Department of Education is unconstitutional and was created illegally by leftist filth. It should never had existed in the first place. The sooner it is completely abolished, the better.

A lot of stuff is unconstitutional.

Over in England, there are still laws on the books [I know this isn't regarding the British constitution, which isn't codified in a single document, so I'm going on a tangent] that ban things like beating a carpet out in the street, or getting drunk in a pub, or vagrancy etc.

There are laws like that in the USA too [again not referring to the constitution per se but just laws]. And the constitution is quite archaic now I'm afraid, maybe it should be updated to fit modern standards.

The constitution will be abolished completely under Trump anyway, so have no fear, if anyone is unconstitutional it ought to be him.
 
TrumpCare™ plan

Republicans had the presidency, the House and the Senate for 2 years and that never happened. Republicans know the Affordable Care Act is good policy. There will be no TrumpCare or it would have happened between 2017-2018. The Affordable Care Act mind as well be a constitutional amendment. People hate it but for some reason they can’t touch it. It is here to stay.
 
Maybe Crooked donnie trump will abolish it after he's reelected, and after he rolls out our great TrumpCare™ plans?

LOLOL!!! 😂 (y)
Your lack of a basic civics education is showing, again. Presidents do not have the authority to create or eliminate departments or agencies within the Executive Branch. Only Congress has that authority.
 
A lot of stuff is unconstitutional.

Over in England, there are still laws on the books [I know this isn't regarding the British constitution, which isn't codified in a single document, so I'm going on a tangent] that ban things like beating a carpet out in the street, or getting drunk in a pub, or vagrancy etc.

There are laws like that in the USA too [again not referring to the constitution per se but just laws]. And the constitution is quite archaic now I'm afraid, maybe it should be updated to fit modern standards.

The constitution will be abolished completely under Trump anyway, so have no fear, if anyone is unconstitutional it ought to be him.
A lot of stuff is unconstitutional. That does not mean we have to tolerate a government that commits crimes against its people. The US Constitution was last updated in 1992 with the Twenty-Seventh Amendment, so it is hardly "archaic." You should try reading it some time. It is very obvious that you haven't from your post.

The US Constitution remains the Supreme Law of the Land and the governing document for our federal government. The federal government is required to abide by the US Constitution exactly as it was written, with no deviations. Laws that do not meet that standard, such as the creation of the Department of Education, are considered unconstitutional and abolished by the Supreme Court when Congress fails to act.

Presidents do not have the authority to create or abolish departments or agencies within the Executive Branch. Only Congress has that authority. The President can sign the law Congress enacts, but Congress must enact the law first. Contrary to the popular belief of leftist filth, Presidents do not have the supreme power to enact whatever law they please.
 
Yes, incorporated. English is rich because of borrowings, but this does create spelling problems.

And sometimes pronunciation problems too. My favorite example: sherbet vs sorbet. (<shrieking> It's "sherbet"--"bet"!--not "bert"!!!)
Why the variance in pronunciation? "Sherbet" descends from the Persian while "sorbet" (pronounced "sor-bay") is French.

<SCREAMING> It's "sherBET," not "sherBERT." Eeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeek!!!!!!!

I prefer lime. 🤑
 
Mate I have a copy of the constitution in the other room and have read it both online and offline many times.

As is often the case with extreme ideologues pushing an agenda, you couldn't be further from the truth

I never said presidents could enact any law they please I'm afraid, nor am I leftist, nor am I filth, but trolling and insults are clearly your way of trying to make yourself feel superior to others on the internet

I'm afraid that the constitution certainly is archaic and outmoded to many people in the USA and many want to update it, Trump even wants to abolish it completely

I never claimed that Congress isn't solely responsible for abolishing depts or agencies, but I also know who appoints civil servants in post and I know that Trump and the 2025 plan is to destroy agencies from within by appointing all the wrong people - and by trying to overturn the constitution, unconstitutionally

I'm sorry you need to insult people to make your massive ego feel superior to others, but that's really not my problem

I feel satisfied by the fact you wrongly charged me with having never read the constitution, when nothing could be further from the truth

Other trolling and spam posts en thread ignored
 
Mate I have a copy of the constitution in the other room and have read it both online and offline many times.

As is often the case with extreme ideologues pushing an agenda, you couldn't be further from the truth

I never said presidents could enact any law they please I'm afraid, nor am I leftist, nor am I filth, but trolling and insults are clearly your way of trying to make yourself feel superior to others on the internet
Pull that stick from your ass. Not every post is about you. I never once alluded that you were anything, other than uninformed about the US Constitution. Which is a factual statement. A document that was updated 32 years ago is not "archaic" by any stretch of the imagination. There are also at least 50 proposed amendments to the US Constitution currently pending in the 118th Session of Congress.

I'm afraid that the constitution certainly is archaic and outmoded to many people in the USA and many want to update it, Trump even wants to abolish it completely
Only leftist filth have utter disregard for the US Constitution and the rule of law, as has been recently demonstrated.

I never claimed that Congress isn't solely responsible for abolishing depts or agencies, but I also know who appoints civil servants in post and I know that Trump and the 2025 plan is to destroy agencies from within by appointing all the wrong people - and by trying to overturn the constitution, unconstitutionally
Yes you did make that claim, when you ignorantly stated that Trump would abolish the US Constitution completely. Obviously made by someone who has never bothered to read the US Constitution, as I posted.

I'm sorry you need to insult people to make your massive ego feel superior to others, but that's really not my problem

I feel satisfied by the fact you wrongly charged me with having never read the constitution, when nothing could be further from the truth

Other trolling and spam posts en thread ignored
I'm sorry you think every post is about you. That says a lot about you, and none of it good.
 
So you say the post isn't about me, but you verbatim posted: "The US Constitution was last updated in 1992 with the Twenty-Seventh Amendment, so it is hardly "archaic." You should try reading it some time. It is very obvious that you haven't from your post."

IOW, you were outright making nonsense up in your above post saying it wasn't about me, when we can see from your other post that it clearly was.

I hope this gaslighting works on someone, because it certainly doesn't work on me

You even stated that I said the exec can abolish fed agencies, I said no such thing, I simply said Trump is going to suspend the constitution, unconstitutionally. You can argue with that all you want, but those were his own words not mine ..

All you appear to have is lies to excuse your beliefs ..
 
So you say the post isn't about me, but you verbatim posted: "The US Constitution was last updated in 1992 with the Twenty-Seventh Amendment, so it is hardly "archaic." You should try reading it some time. It is very obvious that you haven't from your post."

IOW, you were outright making nonsense up in your above post saying it wasn't about me, when we can see from your other post that it clearly was.
I did indeed state that you never read the document and you were speaking from ignorance, and I stand by that statement. However, if you have the ability to comprehend what you read you will see that I never once even suggested you were a leftist or filth. You made that erroneous assumption, because I never said anything of the kind.

I hope this gaslighting works on someone, because it certainly doesn't work on me

You even stated that I said the exec can abolish fed agencies, I said no such thing, I simply said Trump is going to suspend the constitution, unconstitutionally. You can argue with that all you want, but those were his own words not mine ..

All you appear to have is lies to excuse your beliefs ..
Your exact words were: "Trump even wants to abolish it completely" {emphasis added} when referring to the US Constitution. That is in fact stating that "the exec can abolish fed agencies." So you did say it. Now you are trying to cover up what you posted with lies. You never said anything about suspending until this very post.

I'm not the one making up lies here. It is rather foolish to deliberately lie on a public forum.
 
I never said the Exec can abolish federal agencies, I said Trump wants to abolish the constitution and clearly pointed out that that alone was unconstitutional

You are simply speaking nonsense and accusing me of lying, when in fact, all you've done is lie about what I've posted and my beliefs, that seems to be your go-to.

You were obviously inferring in your post who the leftist filth were and all the rest of it, I don't buy your gaslighting

You were wrong about me not reading the constitution, as I happen to have a copy of it in the other room, and I've read it many times online as well. You couldn't be more wrong, but that seems to be normal for many here unfortunately

I suggest you stop digging, but you also seem to be incapable of that either ..
 
Sorry but accolade belongs th Nelson DeMille :).

(j/k but who knows in 500 years...,)

I've read everything he has written.

Somewhat, kinda, sorta, in the same genre is Terry Hayes. I highly recommend him. He has two books that are international best sellers, I Am Pilgram and The Return of the Locust.

Hayes can flat out tell a story. He is a modern master IMHO.
 
Republicans had the presidency, the House and the Senate for 2 years and that never happened. Republicans know the Affordable Care Act is good policy. There will be no TrumpCare or it would have happened between 2017-2018. The Affordable Care Act mind as well be a constitutional amendment. People hate it but for some reason they can’t touch it. It is here to stay.
Isn't that what they said about Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)? :unsure:

There will be no "TrumpCare" because any healthcare spending by the federal government violates the Tenth Amendment. All healthcare spending falls under the exclusive authority of the States. Which is why RomneyCare in Massachusetts is constitutional and why ObamaCare is not.

The Republicans in the 1990s had a plan that would have assisted with healthcare financing that was constitutional. They offered Medical Savings Accounts that anyone could obtain, and all the funds in those accounts would be tax deductible. However, those funds could only be used to pay for healthcare expenses. Since it did not directly effect healthcare, but only how healthcare was financed, it did not violate the Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution.
 
Last edited:
Isn't that what they said about Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973)? :unsure:

There will be no "TrumpCare" because any healthcare spending by the federal government violates the Tenth Amendment. All healthcare spending falls under the exclusive authority of the States. Which is why RomeyCare in Massachusetts is constitutional and why ObamaCare is not.

The Republicans in the 1990s had a plan that would have assisted with healthcare financing that was constitutional. They offered Medical Savings Accounts that anyone could obtain, and all the funds in those accounts would be tax deductible. However, those funds could only be used to pay for healthcare expenses. Since it did not directly effect healthcare, but only how healthcare was financed, it did not violate the Tenth Amendment of the US Constitution.

No.

Easy question, easy answer.
 
I've read everything he has written.

Somewhat, kinda, sorta, in the same genre is Terry Hayes. I highly recommend him. He has two books that are international best sellers, I Am Pilgram and The Return of the Locust.

Hayes can flat out tell a story. He is a modern master IMHO.
I read and enjoyed Plum Island years ago. Picked that because I don't live far from the place. Been meaning to read more of his stuff but have a huge backlog of stuff to read.
 
I disagree with the NY times article title. In my experience fewer and fewer people like reading, and more and more want it over with as quickly as possible.
 
Back
Top Bottom