Do Schools Have Liberal Bias?

[Cruciland]

Obviously that is what they do, duh. Facing the realities that there are for more factors is just to complicated. Just saying they're lazy makes it far easier than actually understanding the problem.

No need to be sarcastic. While it's true that high taxes and job-killing regulations do force some people into welfare, they are getting repealed now that Trump is in office.

To be fair, there are individuals such as the disabled who can't work, as opposed to simply refusing to work. If we simply cut welfare to anyone who can hold a job, it could be a good way to lighten our taxes and debt... although, I do wonder how viable it would be to introduce "having a job" as a human right... Like, the government forcibly creates positions for the unemployed to fill.

Oh well, food for thought.

[Strahcoin]

No need to be sarcastic. While it's true that high taxes and job-killing regulations do force some people into welfare, they are getting repealed now that Trump is in office.

To be fair, there are individuals such as the disabled who can't work, as opposed to simply refusing to work. If we simply cut welfare to anyone who can hold a job, it could be a good way to lighten our taxes and debt... although, I do wonder how viable it would be to introduce "having a job" as a human right... Like, the government forcibly creates positions for the unemployed to fill.

Oh well, food for thought.

I've heard that unemployment for the disabled has gotten down with Trump in office. Ergo, I suspect that they can also hold jobs. But even if they couldn't, private charity is also a viable option. It is also more moral than government welfare, for those who donate to private charity do so voluntarily, and private charity is less wasteful than bureaucratic welfare.

Anyways, I would support putting restrictions on receiving welfare benefits, although I would personally rather see it eliminated.

[Cekoviu]

It's almost like a 1999 out-of-context comment isn't worth reporting on compared to a comment made recently by the sitting president of the United States.

But if trump is racist it makes Cummings racist.

Okay? That's not the point, and it's not correct either, but I'll ignore that. The reason right-wing outlets are covering this "story" from 1999 is not in good faith, but a typical attempt at redirecting the conversation away from Trump's inappropriate comments. Whether Elijah Cummings also made inappropriate comments does not diminish Trump's.
For the record, I don't think his comments on Baltimore are inherently racist. They are, however, not something that a politician should say about their constituents.

[Cekoviu]

Those goalposts are somehow exceeding the speed of light there. First claiming indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism, and then moving to "prevalence of leftist ideology." Pretty good indicator that you're wrong if you have to move them that far.

"Describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology" is not a statement meant to move the goalposts. It is asking you, the person rejecting my sources for being opinionated, to find a source which has no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent, and if applicable, the extent to which it is. I still stand by the idea that it is appallingly prevalent, and resorts to indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism. My challenge to you is to find an article which talks about the subject (of which I am drawing a conclusion on) in a way which does not inevitably wind up taking a side. Because apparently, you seem to reject anything which gives an opinion on the matter.

...unless if it supports your own side, perhaps?

You are talking to the wrong person, as I did none of that. I interjected independently from the person against whom you were arguing.

[Cekoviu]

The problem with CNN isn’t that it’s fake, it’s completely real. The problem begins with the fact that it does not report on a lot of things. take for example; when trump called Baltimore and Cummings “drug infested.” They cries racist! But CNN never reported that Cummings called children in Baltimore “walking like zombies” and “drug infested”

FOX News, however, threw in that side of the story when nobody else would. So much for Politifact's verdict.

PolitiFact made no verdict on the veracity of FOX, only the truth of statements they made. I made a reasonable conclusion based on that.
You are completely wrong that they threw in that side of the story when "nobody else would". This list is literally copied from the first page of search results on DuckDuckGo, with only two links removed (both YouTube links of the actual video):

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50103/watch-video-emerges-elijah-cummings-calling-ryan-saavedra
https://nypost.com/2019/07/31/trump-twe ... -infested/
https://freebeacon.com/politics/elijah- ... sted-area/
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothyme ... d-n2550974
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cum ... -infested/
https://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/2 ... -infested/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/0 ... im-a-pass/
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/07/31 ... ies-780384

[Kombinita Socialisma Demokratio]

Yeah I don’t trust them on climate change when they say it doesn’t exist but CNN is a lot worse when it comes to twisting facts

I don’t trust them on climate change but I doubt they would make up a statistic

I would be a little surprised if it was common practice for the major non-satire news outlets, however, they have on occasion all made the same big mistake^{relevant xkcd}

---

Hopefully Popular Opinion:

The Onion is very biased to the click-baity/humorous, and all profitable news outlets are at least slightly biased to the click-baity.

[Cruciland]

(Image)

"Describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology" is not a statement meant to move the goalposts. It is asking you, the person rejecting my sources for being opinionated, to find a source which has no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent, and if applicable, the extent to which it is. I still stand by the idea that it is appallingly prevalent, and resorts to indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism. My challenge to you is to find an article which talks about the subject (of which I am drawing a conclusion on) in a way which does not inevitably wind up taking a side. Because apparently, you seem to reject anything which gives an opinion on the matter.

...unless if it supports your own side, perhaps?

You are talking to the wrong person, as I did none of that. I interjected independently from the person against whom you were arguing.

Well congratulations- you still completely failed to get my original point, in any case. I extend the same challenge to you, if you want to take it- I'm sure Necroghastia could use a helping hand.

FOX News, however, threw in that side of the story when nobody else would. So much for Politifact's verdict.

PolitiFact made no verdict on the veracity of FOX, only the truth of statements they made. I made a reasonable conclusion based on that.
You are completely wrong that they threw in that side of the story when "nobody else would". This list is literally copied from the first page of search results on DuckDuckGo, with only two links removed (both YouTube links of the actual video):

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50103/watch-video-emerges-elijah-cummings-calling-ryan-saavedra
https://nypost.com/2019/07/31/trump-twe ... -infested/
https://freebeacon.com/politics/elijah- ... sted-area/
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothyme ... d-n2550974
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cum ... -infested/
https://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/2 ... -infested/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/0 ... im-a-pass/
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/07/31 ... ies-780384

Dailywire, New York Post, Free Beacon, Townhall... Yup, I stand corrected- it isn't just FOX, it's the likes of FOX who threw in that side of the story. Literally every media source you just listed has a right-of-center bias to them, FOX just happens to be the only one of which is mainstream.

Funny how the right-wing media seems to be the only group telling the other side of the story there. It's almost as if reality has a right bias. :3c

[Necroghastia]

Those goalposts are somehow exceeding the speed of light there. First claiming indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism, and then moving to "prevalence of leftist ideology." Pretty good indicator that you're wrong if you have to move them that far.

"Describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology" is not a statement meant to move the goalposts. It is asking you, the person rejecting my sources for being opinionated, to find a source which has no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent, and if applicable, the extent to which it is.
I still stand by the idea that it is appallingly prevalent, and resorts to indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism. My challenge to you is to find an article which talks about the subject (of which I am drawing a conclusion on) in a way which does not inevitably wind up taking a side. Because apparently, you seem to reject anything which gives an opinion on the matter.

...unless if it supports your own side, perhaps?

And again, you have yet to demonstrate that this "indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism" exists. All you have pointed to are opinion pieces. Not studies, not raw data. I'm certainly not going to find a source that has "no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent" because that's a) an utter non-sequitur, and b) irrelevant to my argument.

[Katganistan]

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

I legitimately have no idea how to respond to this. There's no way anyone can seriously say that with a straight face.

Look at all the people who voted for Trump and then were horrified that their tax returns were emaciated -- and the farmers who are literally going under -- and wait til these economic sanctions not only DON'T restore jobs here but also raise prices at places like Wal-Mart where people get inexpensive Chinese goods.

Fun times.

[Cekoviu]

You are talking to the wrong person, as I did none of that. I interjected independently from the person against whom you were arguing.

Well congratulations- you still completely failed to get my original point, in any case. I extend the same challenge to you, if you want to take it- I'm sure Necroghastia could use a helping hand.

I'm relaxing for the first time in over a year this week, so excuse me if I don't want to spend my time educating someone unwilling to be educated. Necroghastia can handle it.

PolitiFact made no verdict on the veracity of FOX, only the truth of statements they made. I made a reasonable conclusion based on that.
You are completely wrong that they threw in that side of the story when "nobody else would". This list is literally copied from the first page of search results on DuckDuckGo, with only two links removed (both YouTube links of the actual video):

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50103/watch-video-emerges-elijah-cummings-calling-ryan-saavedra
https://nypost.com/2019/07/31/trump-twe ... -infested/
https://freebeacon.com/politics/elijah- ... sted-area/
https://townhall.com/tipsheet/timothyme ... d-n2550974
https://www.independentsentinel.com/cum ... -infested/
https://www.commonsenseevaluation.com/2 ... -infested/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/0 ... im-a-pass/
https://www.bizpacreview.com/2019/07/31 ... ies-780384

Dailywire, New York Post, Free Beacon, Townhall... Yup, I stand corrected- it isn't just FOX, it's the likes of FOX who threw in that side of the story. Literally every media source you just listed has a right-of-center bias to them, FOX just happens to be the only one of which is mainstream.

Funny how the right-wing media seems to be the only group telling the other side of the story there. It's almost as if reality has a right bias. :3c

Orrrr they're trying to distract from Trump and give their viewer base a boost for their Democratic hate boners, as I said earlier. Whataboutism is so prevalent in media these days that it's imperceptible to most, but this is a ridiculous case of that.

[Cruciland]

"Describing the nature and prevalence of leftist ideology" is not a statement meant to move the goalposts. It is asking you, the person rejecting my sources for being opinionated, to find a source which has no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent, and if applicable, the extent to which it is.
I still stand by the idea that it is appallingly prevalent, and resorts to indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism. My challenge to you is to find an article which talks about the subject (of which I am drawing a conclusion on) in a way which does not inevitably wind up taking a side. Because apparently, you seem to reject anything which gives an opinion on the matter.

...unless if it supports your own side, perhaps?

And again, you have yet to demonstrate that this "indoctrination, censorship, and historical revisionism" exists. All you have pointed to are opinion pieces. Not studies, not raw data. I'm certainly not going to find a source that has "no opinion on whether or not leftism is prevalent" because that's a) an utter non-sequitur, and b) irrelevant to my argument.

r/woooosh

Would it be worth pointing out that your entire argument is irrelevant on grounds of being based on a false premise? Or that perhaps it would be more productive to find a source of your own which has studies and raw data? Or, even better yet, to look at the links and citations in the "opinion pieces" I gave for some direction?

Dailywire, New York Post, Free Beacon, Townhall... Yup, I stand corrected- it isn't just FOX, it's the likes of FOX who threw in that side of the story. Literally every media source you just listed has a right-of-center bias to them, FOX just happens to be the only one of which is mainstream.

Funny how the right-wing media seems to be the only group telling the other side of the story there. It's almost as if reality has a right bias. :3c

Orrrr they're trying to distract from Trump and give their viewer base a boost for their Democratic hate boners, as I said earlier. Whataboutism is so prevalent in media these days that it's imperceptible to most, but this is a ridiculous case of that.

Funnily enough, almost all the mud slung at Trump is whataboutism, if not blatant fabrication. But, your perspective may never permit you to see that.

[Page]

To be fair, there are individuals such as the disabled who can't work, as opposed to simply refusing to work. If we simply cut welfare to anyone who can hold a job, it could be a good way to lighten our taxes and debt... although, I do wonder how viable it would be to introduce "having a job" as a human right... Like, the government forcibly creates positions for the unemployed to fill.

Oh well, food for thought.

I've heard that unemployment for the disabled has gotten down with Trump in office. Ergo, I suspect that they can also hold jobs. But even if they couldn't, private charity is also a viable option. It is also more moral than government welfare, for those who donate to private charity do so voluntarily, and private charity is less wasteful than bureaucratic welfare.

Anyways, I would support putting restrictions on receiving welfare benefits, although I would personally rather see it eliminated.

Welfare is bureaucratic precisely because the government has put so many restrictions on it already. The more rules and regulations imposed on welfare recipients, the larger of a bureaucratic apparatus is needed to maintain it. When Florida implemented an unconstitutional law that welfare recipients have to be drug tested, those tests cost the state significantly more money, hundreds of thousands of dollars to pay for the tests themselves.

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/18/us/n ... tests.html

Had the government not implemented so many restrictions in the first place, welfare would cost significantly less. But even now, it's still a drop in the bucket. Why worry about the penny taken from your paycheck to fund welfare instead of the dollars that fund wars in countries that never attacked us? Why focus on the food stamps one needs so they can have enough to eat rather than the billions of bailout dollars with which the wealthy recipients gave themselves bonuses and bought more private jets?

[Tobleste]

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

I legitimately have no idea how to respond to this. There's no way anyone can seriously say that with a straight face.

That's my issue with some American right wingers. It's difficult to tell when they're joking, when they're lying and when they're being serious. Their arguments are so distant from reality that it's difficult to know where the start.

[Cruciland]

I legitimately have no idea how to respond to this. There's no way anyone can seriously say that with a straight face.

That's my issue with some American right wingers. It's difficult to tell when they're joking, when they're lying and when they're being serious. Their arguments are so distant from reality that it's difficult to know where the start.

I'm guessing it has something to do with entitled brats and the sin of envy.

[The Archipelago Territory]

Good point. Some are racists, some are misogynists and some are greedy rich people (Trump is all 3 and still not a bible thumper for example).*

*This applies to US conservatives, not non American,1st world conservatives who do have compassion for people not 99% similar to them.

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

I love how it’s assumed there could be 63,000,000 racists in the US. How can one speak for all trump voters?

It’s just like anchor babies, when the SC has never ruled that they are US citizens. The PERSON WHO WROTE THE 14th amendment said himself that if someone has a baby and leaves the US they are not a US citizen. But it’s been lost in history, along with the removed statues

Then school would be biased towards the right anyway.

[Kowani]

Good point. Some are racists, some are misogynists and some are greedy rich people (Trump is all 3 and still not a bible thumper for example).*

*This applies to US conservatives, not non American,1st world conservatives who do have compassion for people not 99% similar to them.

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

Citation needed.

[Jello Biafra]

Yes, in the same way that reality has a liberal bias.

[Greater Loegria]

Most do yes.

I went to catholic boarding school which was largely quite conservative. But most of my peers who went elsewhere have been subjected to an almighty mountain of steaming liberal/leftist tripe.

The ‘progressive left’’s March to the Institutions was a thing. A thing they even admit to.

[Nakena]

Yes, in the same way that reality has a liberal bias.

No they don't and neither has reality.

[Tobleste]

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

I love how it’s assumed there could be 63,000,000 racists in the US. How can one speak for all trump voters?

It’s just like anchor babies, when the SC has never ruled that they are US citizens. The PERSON WHO WROTE THE 14th amendment said himself that if someone has a baby and leaves the US they are not a US citizen. But it’s been lost in history, along with the removed statues

Then school would be biased towards the right anyway.

Trump can speak for trump voters and he spreads lies and hatred towards minorities all the time. Hence, people believe Trump voters are racist.

[Cruciland]

I love how it’s assumed there could be 63,000,000 racists in the US. How can one speak for all trump voters?

It’s just like anchor babies, when the SC has never ruled that they are US citizens. The PERSON WHO WROTE THE 14th amendment said himself that if someone has a baby and leaves the US they are not a US citizen. But it’s been lost in history, along with the removed statues

Then school would be biased towards the right anyway.

Trump can speak for trump voters and he spreads lies and hatred towards minorities all the time. Hence, people believe Trump voters are racist.

That's a blatant lie, and you would know that if you listened to anyone outside of the MSN/NBC/CNN/WaPo/Buzzfeed/Vice/DailyBeast/etc. corporate media conglomerate.

[Necroghastia]

Trump can speak for trump voters and he spreads lies and hatred towards minorities all the time. Hence, people believe Trump voters are racist.

That's a blatant lie, and you would know that if you listened to anyone outside of the MSN/NBC/CNN/WaPo/Buzzfeed/Vice/DailyBeast/etc. corporate media conglomerate.

I dunno, it's a pretty easy conclusion to draw just by listening to the man himself.

[The Serbian Empire]

Most of the greed in America is from the poor. Not the rich.

I love how it’s assumed there could be 63,000,000 racists in the US. How can one speak for all trump voters?

It’s just like anchor babies, when the SC has never ruled that they are US citizens. The PERSON WHO WROTE THE 14th amendment said himself that if someone has a baby and leaves the US they are not a US citizen. But it’s been lost in history, along with the removed statues

Then school would be biased towards the right anyway.

The demographics change of education level in the GOP does imply that Trump has relied on dogwhistling racists. The college educated are leaving the party as seen in many districts that went from red to blue. Of course by going to college, one is more likely to meet those from different ethnic backgrounds than you from all over the globe.

[Loftegen 2]

They had liberal bias 30 years ago when I was in school!

[Frisbeeteria]

Since there are state schools here in Britain, whose teachers have the right to tell their pupils they themselves are homosexual, and plaster the walls of their classrooms with political posters promoting
homosexuality, the answer is yes.