... The recent descriptions of the behavior
of some of our justices and particularly their attempts to defend their
conduct have not just raised my eyebrows; theyâve raised the whole top
of my head. Lavish, no-cost vacations? Hypertechnical arguments about
how a free private airplane flight is a kind of facility? A justiceâs spouse prominently involved in advocating on issues before the court without the justiceâs recusal? Repeated omissions
in mandatory financial disclosure statements brushed under the rug as
inadvertent? A justiceâs taxpayer-financed staff reportedly helping to promote her books? Private school tuition for a justiceâs family member covered by a wealthy benefactor? Wow.
Although
the exact numbers fluctuate because of vacancies, the core of our
federal judiciary comprises roughly 540 magistrate judges, 670 district
judges, 180 appeals court judges and nine Supreme Court justices â fewer
than 1,500 men and women in a country of more than 330 million people
and 3.8 million square miles. Much depends on this small cohortâs acute
sense of smell, its instinctive, uncompromising integrity and its
appearance of integrity. If reports are true, some of our justices are,
sadly, letting us down.
To me, this feels personal. For the country, it feels ominous. What in the world has happened to the Supreme Courtâs nose?
if we're talking about racial discrimination i'm not sure
and would they accept any explanation that was offered?
Very valid point. Talking to someone who believes that racism and discrimination is an inherent part of their life, trying to suggest that it's not as bad as they think, seems like a futile conversation. Look back over the decades of protest music, and those frustrations with the Man keeping them down, and then say, "yeah, but your protests have helped and it certainly still exists but there's been major steps forward" and you can predict the reaction.
Is that because - and this is my wide swing at racism - that those races put an awful lot of importance on education, and donât appreciate someone not working as hard but getting the same opportunity? I can see why they would see a problem there. How would you talk them down from that?
if we're talking about racial discrimination i'm not sure
and would they accept any explanation that was offered?
It's also a way in many states to slow bleed the pension requirements of public school teachers (which is easier than confronting the issue). Charter and magnate schools deliver results, vouchers do not. Underfunding public education is one of the largest problems faced in this country.
You left out that the idea of a "private" school is rooted in racism.
One of the very first things we can do to help get started is to make school choice and vouchers a universal option. This would be an exception to the one size fits all policies that as a rule do not work.
As is usually the case with the Republican mantra, the programs they support are more about transferring tax dollars to people who have decided on alternatives to public education than it is about performance. Both families with greater means and those who make money from the voucher program (see: Betsy DeVos).
It's also a way in many states to slow bleed the pension requirements of public school teachers (which is easier than confronting the issue). Charter and magnate schools deliver results, vouchers do not. Underfunding public education is one of the largest problems faced in this country.
School choice aligns with the pro-birth, the hell with them once they're born policies of the right.
asians and indians (aka the new jews) are rejoicing
Is that because - and this is my wide swing at racism - that those races put an awful lot of importance on education, and donât appreciate someone not working as hard but getting the same opportunity? I can see why they would see a problem there. How would you talk them down from that?
Absolutely...specifically improving the education of students in poor communities would go a long way towards "lifting all boats" and address so many of the adult problems we have, eg crime, homelessness, drug addiction, bad politics (ha).
There should be some way to make a nice slogan that summarizes: we donât need everyone to have advanced degrees in complex subjects, but we DO need everyone to be literate and know how to balance a checkbook and work at some sort of job.
Is that the responsibility of the college, or of the family/culture/elementary school system that the person is reared in? Iâll suggest that people pushing for affirmative action do so because they lack that fundamental starting position of simple competency. To give them a leg up into college is doing it many years too late.
This is the very same thing I have heard those who support this decision say. By addressing education at the beginning rather than at the end will make things like affirmative action a backward rather than a forward policy, that in this case has outlived its purpose.
One of the very first things we can do to help get started is to make school choice and vouchers a universal option. This would be an exception to the one size fits all policies that as a rule do not work.
There's no rule. Charter schools are a boon in some areas and a 100% grift in others.
Special Ed is drowning public schools, and Voucher-Loving Tax-Hating families are using it to speed up the process by homeschooling everyone but the kids who need special services, making cost-per-pupil vastly higher than at charter schools.
Absolutely...specifically improving the education of students in poor communities would go a long way towards "lifting all boats" and address so many of the adult problems we have, eg crime, homelessness, drug addiction, bad politics (ha).
This is the very same thing I have heard those who support this decision say. By addressing education at the beginning rather than at the end will make things like affirmative action a backward rather than a forward policy, that in this case has outlived its purpose.
One of the very first things we can do to help get started is to make school choice and vouchers a universal option. This would be an exception to the one size fits all policies that as a rule do not work.
This is an amazing discussion because the counterarguments are so appealing.
The fascination with elite college admission is so great because it affects so few people. About 44% of Americans over 25 have a college degree. That means the majority don't. Their interest in this topic is purely political since you could argue the discussion had no impact on their lives.
The focus on anything college is the Ivy League, and Harvard is the pinnacle of assumed achievement. The reality is that almost nobody gets into Harvard anyway (I think their acceptance rate was under 4% this year). For anyone thinking that it was affirmative action's fault you didn't get into Harvard, you're fooling yourself.
The reality is that the vast majority of colleges admit the majority of applicants (80% from the chart below in 2017).
This is yet another cultural argument that feels like a victory to some, but it won't really matter. Harvard folks are smart enough to find ways to admit the students they want.
How many trans women athletes are there playing college sports? The current estimates are less than 100. There were 226,212 women participating in NCAA championship sports this year. A tiny discussion.
We should be worrying about the national drop in k-12 test scores post-pandemic. Instead of focusing on books that kids shouldn't read, we should worry that they can't read them anyway.
We're focused on things that have very little impact on the lives of anyone while ignoring the severe limitations of entire generations.
Absolutely...specifically improving the education of students in poor communities would go a long way towards "lifting all boats" and address so many of the adult problems we have, eg crime, homelessness, drug addiction, bad politics (ha).
This is an amazing discussion because the counterarguments are so appealing.
The fascination with elite college admission is so great because it affects so few people. About 44% of Americans over 25 have a college degree. That means the majority don't. Their interest in this topic is purely political since you could argue the discussion had no impact on their lives.
The focus on anything college is the Ivy League, and Harvard is the pinnacle of assumed achievement. The reality is that almost nobody gets into Harvard anyway (I think their acceptance rate was under 4% this year). For anyone thinking that it was affirmative action's fault you didn't get into Harvard, you're fooling yourself.
The reality is that the vast majority of colleges admit the majority of applicants (80% from the chart below in 2017).
This is yet another cultural argument that feels like a victory to some, but it won't really matter. Harvard folks are smart enough to find ways to admit the students they want.
How many trans women athletes are there playing college sports? The current estimates are less than 100. There were 226,212 women participating in NCAA championship sports this year. A tiny discussion.
We should be worrying about the national drop in k-12 test scores post-pandemic. Instead of focusing on books that kids shouldn't read, we should worry that they can't read them anyway.
We're focused on things that have very little impact on the lives of anyone while ignoring the severe limitations of entire generations.
