Nancy Bailey writes here about Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos’ contempt for the time-honored tradition of separation of church and state. She has made clear her strong preference for religious schools and her low opinion of public schools. We have never in our history had a Secretary of Education (or before the Education Department was created in 1980, a Commissioner of Education) who was so flagrantly hostile to public schools. Reagan’s second Secretary of Education Bill Bennett was a cheerleader for “choice,” but in the early 1980s, he didn’t have the wind behind his back nor did he have Betsy’s billions to advance the cause.
The United States is a very diverse nation, where people are associated with scores of different religions or none at all. The Founders wrote the First Amendment to prohibit the establishment of any official religion and to protect the free exercise of religion. They knew the dangers of state-sponsored religion. In our time, rightwing libertarians and anti-government ideologues are using their political clout to support government funding for religious schools.
It’s worth noting that every state referendum on vouchers for religious schools has gone down to a decisive defeat, most recently in Arizona, where 65% said no to vouchers.
DeVos has taken advantage of the pandemic to divert billions of dollars to private and religious schools, usually at the expense of public schools, which enroll the students with the greatest needs.
One good reason to vote for Joe Biden is to send DeVos home to Michigan.
He can’t possibly appoint anyone worse than DeVos.
Diane Ravitch's blog 
Re: One good reason to vote for Joe Biden is to send DeVos home to Michigan.
I have another place in mind …
Great minds think alike . No need for further details.
Reblogged this on David R. Taylor-Thoughts on Education.
This is the time of the year when World History is studying he French Revolution. During that conflagration, the revolution attempted to wipe religion from the French experience. Ever since then, those who want change have been the victims of a right wing which warns that the people who want change will take away their religion. Nothin could be further from the truth.
From the historian’s point of view, it was the incestuous relationship between the church of the day and the French Monarchy that sealed the fate of both. The days of Cardinal Mazarin being the church leader who ruled when Louis XIV was a boy were etched in the minds of the French people. They wanted their God, but they rejected their religious leaders as political leaders. A generation later, Victor Hugo, the author derided by monarchists as a “Christian Socialist,” wrote as much in Les Miserables.
The lesson of the French Revolution is not that a left wing government will take away your religion. Rather it is that mixing government with religion corrupts both, with religion bearing the majority of that degradation.
A recent poll indicated that 69% of practicing Catholics are Trump supporters.
Is this the poll you’re referring to? It’s not national, it’s about PA. “The split is evident in recent polling in the all-important state of Pennsylvania. Among those who say they are practicing Catholics, 69 percent support Trump. However, 60 percent of those who are non-practicing Catholics back Biden.” [The Hill, 9/12]. PA voters went 48%-47% for Trump in 2016. The split they’re referring to (the subject of the article) is between those who see abortion as the paramount voting issue and ‘social justice Catholics.’
I can’t find numbers on the PA Catholic vote in 2016 that might show whether the current poll represents a change. However there’s an interesting analysis of 2016 voting here: https://www.thecatholicthing.org/2016/11/12/rustbelt-catholics-put-trump-over-the-top/ Highlights:
In those states [rust belt including PA], aging churchgoing Catholics are disproportionately represented, because their children and grandchildren have moved to more economically prosperous regions. “ They speak of 3 segments of PA voters, including “the economically depressed western portion of the state, predominantly older, socially conservative, and Catholic.” And note that “country-club Catholics in the affluent suburbs outside of Philadelphia overstated their support for Clinton to pollsters,” while “Catholics came out in the old coal and steel towns in western Pennsylvania… in force.”
It’s just possible Biden’s combo of Scranton blue-collar background & ‘social justice’ Catholicism might push that mix in a different direction—as pundits say, “It’s a turnout election.” At least he’s already doing what Clinton didn’t: showing up there.
A larger number of People raised Catholic no longer attend church. It is much the same in all the mainstream religions.
Correct, Roy, just adding here that stats show Catholics are leaving the fold at something like 5x the rate of other denominations.
Roy-
About the sheep leaving the fold-
The remaining congregants and their clergy have sufficient clout to turn back the rights of the American people.
The schemes of the conservative theocracy e.g. state Catholic Conferences and Leonard Leo’s Federalist Society, continue unabated.
Bishops promote pro-birth legislation and court decision (which singles out women for effect) as paramount over judgements about Trump’s racism, lying, cheating, ties to Putin, his attacks on common goods, rule of law and democracy, his promulgation of income disparity and, his suppression of the vote abetted by the conservative Catholic, William Barr. Evidently, the monolithic Church leadership has interest in something other than decency and number of congregants, just as Jefferson warned.
Trump placed evangelical Ted Cruz on his short list for SCOTUS justice. A former Catholic, GOP speaker of the U.S. House described Cruz as, “Lucifer himself”.
Democrats offer as their candidate, a practicing Catholic and still, Catholic bishops demand a vote for Trump. Despots recognize the importance of Catholic bishops and reached out to them to guarantee a win at the ballot box,
People who understand anything at all about religious freedom know it depends essentially on the absolute separation of Church and State.
Exactly. The United States is far more religious today than are the nations of Europe that had established religions.
Far more $ackreligious too.
“The American Church”
American Church is business
American God is Gates
And godly wealth means fitness
To enter Heaven’s gates
when god is money and the church is Wall Street
Yes Bob, an interesting topic. I’ve always thought it might have to do with just less time in the saddle here in the US. We were founded by passionate, marginal sects seeking to escape suppression by monarchists imposing national religious practice– and continued our path from that reality. Meanwhile, England and other Euro nations moved on; they’d had millennia to sort this out.
Well said, Ginny!
Yes, Bob and Bethree-
Let’s just go with the “less time in the saddle” thing and ignore the “nation is on the cusp of fascism” thing.
LOL, Linda. Yes. I really need to turn my attention to the important things like deciding which Marvel Universe film to watch on Netflix next. Global warming? Full-fledged fascism in the United States? Paramilitary thugs in the streets? Education in American exceptionalism? The Pandemic surge? Massive unemployment? No prob. What’s new with Captain America? Will he get over having his feelings hurt and save the day?
This morning on MSNBC, Joe Scarborough quoted from the Hannah Arendt’s “Origins of Totalitarianism” a passage. Paraphrased: One of the steps toward totalitarianism is to get rid of known-to-be-competent bureaucrats and high positions in government offices and departments and replace them with stupid people who have no relevant experience . . . because they will be most easily turned into buffoon sycophants. CBK
It is extremely troubling that Don the Con has replaced the leaders of the DOJ and the intelligence services with political toadies.
And oh the irony that the least religious of presidents is using the religious extremists to achieve his personal ends.
Bob Not really a new idea . . . but Treasonous Trump HAS taken it to new heights. But I really don’t see the US becoming a theocracy . . . think middle-east where the religious leader has some serious control over the political arena.
It seems to me that, in OUR case in history, religious people and their leaders are just pawns for the real holders of power. My guess is that most oligarchs could give a hoot about abortion, for instance; but at best for the religious who really do care about abortion, the oligarchs will pander to them with policy–as long as it doesn’t interfere with their own despicable goals.
BTW, it doesn’t take much of a reading of the New Testament to understand this: Jesus was a non-racist liberal.
Stick THAT in your craw, all you so-called conservative think tanks, e.g., The Federalist Society. CBK
Trump’s only god is Mammon
I agree with irony comment, and with Catherine’s comparison to modern Middle East leaders. It is about power.
Roy and Bob Another irony of history: the more political power any particular religion gains, the more they stray away from their founders’ principles. Christianity is certainly no exemption. CBK
Catherine: Far from being an exception, Christianity has been the poster child for having too much political power. You are correct.
Hello Catherine,
Hannah Arendt’s Origins of Totalitarianism should be required reading in every high school. I’d also like to see Carl Jung’s Civilization in Transition in every high school, too. 🙂
Mamie Yes, indeed . . . what an eye-opener THAT book is. CBK
P.S: How about the American People make it required reading for all government workers, all the way up to the President. I don’t always like tests . . . but I would heartily endorse one for that requirement.
As one who cares deeply about Arendt’s writings and lectures, her writing should never be required reading in high school. Far too dense and requires a great deal of knowledge about history, politics, and philosophy.
Hello GregB,
Well, you have to start somewhere. Excerpts could definitely be used.
Greg is apparently correct about the density of Arendrt’s writing.
There’s an Arendt Center at a liberal college in the U.S. Its director sided with the Koch view that public pensions should be eliminated. He doubled down when questioned.
Either Arendt didn’t address the threat concentration of wealth poses, which would be an egregious oversight, or her writing is open for interpretation.
Linda If you’ve read even a few paragraphs from her work, you’d understand why I think your note is . . . well . . . misinformed.
And BTW, K-12 deals with many age groups and moments of development (duh); and so such a work as Arendt’s would commonly be adapted and integrated by dedicated and intelligent curriculum writers and teachers to age appropriate sections in the curriculum.
For today’s high school juniors and seniors, however, I can see them reading sections of the work directly, especially with real films and other additions to enrich the curricula. With tech, and with today’s issues, I think we’ve entered a new time of political awareness in younger people. Times, . . . they are a changin’ . . .
Go read it. It’s eye-popping. When I have time I’ll see if I can find what she says about wealth . . .it’s been awhile since I read it; but my guess is that she did not overlook that point, even though she could not have known what kind of wealth we deal with today. CBK
Linda an addendum to my other note . . . you say Arendt’s work is open to interpretation. ALL reading in interpreted reading. The question is whether it’s interpreted correctly.
As far as denseness is concerned, Arendt is a lot less dense and more readable to the non-technical reader than most philosophical or technical-theoretical work I have ever read. It was the same with reading Alexis de Toqueville’s Democracy in America–another delightfully appropriate and today-relevant read from the 1800’s. CBK
CBK, so you start you comment by claiming “you’d understand why I think your note is . . . well . . . misinformed.” And then you end it with “When I have time I’ll see if I can find what she says about wealth . . .it’s been awhile since I read it; but my guess is that she did not overlook that point, even though she could not have known what kind of wealth we deal with today.”
Love that intellectual sureness and consistency.
GregB I guess, then, you remember every part of every book you ever read. If so, I certainly don’t have as good a memory. Also, I though this was a blog format and not a place where we give papers and college lectures.
I’m pretty sure we’re on the same page about fascism/ totalitarianism here anyway . . . so I have to wonder why the nit-picking. In any case, as I suggested in my note, reading and, for me, re-reading Arendt’s work is hardly a sign of sloppy scholarship. CBK
Greg-
As you’ve noted, there’s a commenter who trolls me and pronounces me wrong while, pompously, excusing his/her unwillingness to check the evidence.
A recent subject was school choice and the state Catholic Conferences’ politicking.
Liinda Well, then, I take it that you’ve ordered a copy of Hannah Arendt’s “Origins of Totalitarianism.” Enjoy!
CBK
The intertwining of religion and the state is a slippery slope. Separation of church and state allows for clear boundaries of responsibility and freedom between both religion and the state. Recent decisions have muddied the waters between the two realms. Some court decisions based on religion have felt more like handing religious groups the right to discriminate against others on the basis of religion. Sending public money to religious schools that discriminate against students of color and LBGT people is another example of a law pandering religious groups while denying justice to others.
“felt like”
The SCOTUS decision in Biel v. St; James Catholic school officially legitimized, in law, discrimination at schools funded by taxpayers.
Linda You are obsessing again. CBK
CBK, I don’t think you can dismiss Linda’s concern w/that case as [anti-Catholic] “obsession.” Biel was fired because she notified the school she’d been diagnosed with breast cancer and would have to take time off for treatment. SCOTUS was oblivious to the details, decided on the basis of prior case that “the government cannot control a church school’s decision about who teaches its religion classes.” Huh? Even if she’s sick??
While I agree w/SCOTUS’ basis for the decision, the true issue there, it seems to me, is our nation’s pathetic healthcare system. Biel no doubt lost health ins due to her employer’s decision & was left hanging in the breeze. Nevertheless, Catholics, via their religious schools’ crummy low-paid low-bennies teaching positions shouldn’t get off so easy. As a Catholic, I see the treatment of that teacher as hardly Christian. (Would they have treated a nun the same way? How about a monk with prostate cancer?)
I admit the SCOTUS decision is technically correct, yet at the same time I worry about SCOTUS decisions that seem to be coming ever closer to muddying that state-religion line. What if this had been a publicly-funded voucher school? Would SCOTUS deem any healthcare or anti-woman or other breach of commonly-accepted employer/ employee contract law OK just because it was a religious school? These questions go to public-goods issues, regardless of the details of who’s funding/ employing.
bethree5 “CBK, I don’t think you can dismiss Linda’s concern w/that case as [anti-Catholic] ‘obsession.’”
I appreciate your concern. However, it’s not “that case” or any other factual stuff, but rather the constant barrage, cherry-picking, and over-focus on the Catholic Church–looks like obsession to me.
Even correct facts give a distorted impression and even hurt the truth of one’s own argument (The Church, indeed, is in need of criticism), when piled on, over and over a gain, presented as abstractions and out-of-context, and brought up in almost every new post regardless.
I’m still wondering if we are going to hear statistics about Catholic voting that were presented recently as if they were national statistics; when (in another note here) the question was raised by someone else about their being statistics from one state/Pennsylvania with a potentially questionable source. If so, it’s a “convenient” but misleading omission . . . added to the pile of Linda’s anti-Catholic messages.
Regardless, and thankfully, two other writers here put even those statistics into their broader context of Catholics leaving the Church and other relevant data. But again, I appreciate your concern. CBK
How Biden and Nancy Pelosi are Catholic. So is Sonia Sotomayer. Enough with the anti-Catholicism!
Enough with the school choice politicking of the state Catholic Conferences or, enough with exposing it?
Enough with the links between the state Conferences and the Koch network.
Enough with the state Catholic Conferences that politick to oppose bans on conversion therapy in tax supported schools.
Enough with Knights of Columbus’ barely hidden politicking for Trump and other GOP candidates.
Enough with William Barr’s publicly- declared plan to introduce religion at every opportunity.
Enough with Bellwether’s advice to ed reformers that they should reach out to churches.
Enough with the Cristo Rey chain of schools which received funding from Gates and Walton heirs and, that has a prototype with 60 students per class.
Enough with a chain of tax supported religious schools in 17 states that have impoverished, minority students working for private firms one week a month, with some of them returning their pay to the school.
Enough with religious universities that purport to establish through contrived correlations, the superiority of Catholic schools over public schools, in the subjective area of better character traits.
Enough with a SCOTUS decision that classified teachers as ministerial in duty opening the door for all religious organization employees to be exempted from civil rights employment law.
Enough with the replacement of Ginsberg, whose religion was not at the core of her decisions, with religious zealot Amy Barrett.
Enough with the Manhattan Declaration’s significance to American rights.
….
If pointing out the inconsistencies of those who profess to be devout Catholics (or members of any religion or ethical/moral code, for that matter) is enough to be labeled “anti-Catholic,” then I guess I’m guilty. If, on the other hand, using the example that Bethree cites above that 69% of practicing Catholics in Pennsylvania, also holds, then–and I’m paraphrasing here–when commentators more than imply, “pay attention to the 31%, they’re real Catholics,” and anyone who points out the 69% is “anti-Catholic,” then it more than burns my britches.
I also point out the hypocrisy of observant Jews who are just fine with the atrocities that are committed every day against Palestinians. There are a lot of Jews, by the way, who agree with me on this. But they are often characterized as self-hating Jews. The same is true of Islam. The same is true of self-described right wing “evangelical Christians” who are happy to judge but scream murder when their love of power over ethics and morality is pointed out.
I will not be or have my comments characterized as anti-Catholic and it offends me that someone I admire and whose views I generally agree with would do so in a knee-jerk fashion. If these comments cut too close to the quick, might I suggest the future omission of posts like this since. Pointing out hypocrisy is not anti-anything. It is what I thought was a central point of this blog.
Why should I not have posted Nancy Bailey’s comments on DeVos and her aversion to separation of church and state? I have written many posts on the subject. I believe strongly in separation of church and state.
…since they invite accurate comments to support the views expressed in the post.
Because you wrote “Enough with the anti-Catholicism!” The comments and individuals you desecrate with the label “anti-Catholicism” are about individuals and trends to which large numbers of Catholics adhere–not all, and we make that clear over and over and over again. These comments are anti-hypocrisy. Indeed, I would posit, “Enough with simplistic labels.”
Joe Biden is Catholic.
Nancy Pelosi isCatholic.
Greg-
An example of tribalism-
It’s reported that 60% of white Catholics supported Trump in 2016, a statistic that included “practicing” and “non-practicing” Catholics. Four years later, there’s a report that shows “practicing” Catholics skew more conservative than the general pool by 9%. An outside observer would view it as a plausible scenario. A tribalist would attack the person who repeated the statistic and describe the source of the research as sketchy.
OK, since simplistic labels now pass for reasoned discourse on this issue on this blog, how’s this?:
Timothy Dolan is a Catholic. Steve Scalise is a Catholic. William Barr is a Catholic. Leonard Leo is a Catholic. Neil Gorsuch is a Catholic. Brett Kavanaugh is a Catholic. And they all undermine and oppose the teachings and policies of Pope Francis, who, I hear, might also be Catholic.
And here are some more Catholics: https://sojo.net/magazine/march-2019/rise-catholic-right
What is your point? Mine is that there are many different political opinions among Catholics. Some are conservative. Some are liberal.
Why don’t Democrats Biden and Pelosi call out the leaders of an organization that they belong to, for politicking against Democrats?
How do Tim Kaine and Nancy Pelosi view themselves when, during the week they advocate for women’s equality and then, on Sunday meet with an organization that prohibits women from leadership roles and that finances campaigns against women’s rights?
Do they have that much to lose politically? If the data from Penn. is consistent with data from the other states that are important to the election, only 30% of practicing Catholics are going to vote for Biden and there’s no reason to assume they’ll abandon him. Dems might gain votes. Silence is clearly not working. Conservative religious PR has already created and promoted the false narrative that they are under attack. Why don’t Dems at least try to tell the public the truth, America and Americans are under attack from theocracy?
Linda That’s a BIG IF about Pennsylvania statistics being similar to other states. But I will assume your questions are sincere. And so with that in mind,
First, we don’t know what Biden or Kaine or Pelosi say or have said for YEARS behind the scenes of public display. It may have been “worse” had they and others like them not been there.
also, it may just be a matter of: “my life is this way; yours is different; this is America where you need not follow my religious tenets; by Law there is no State Religion; and as a person and as a public representative, I leave your relationship to God to you and yours–as the Constitution implies . . . public servants and the law have no formal place in how you live out that relationship.”
On that, I think Biden is more authentically Christian precisely because he doesn’t go around waving his worship routine in others’ faces. . . there’s a different meaning to “closet” in that respect than relates to being gay.
Perhaps, since the public spotlight has changed so much, someone will ask that question of Biden and we can get some answers to it from his view. He is not the only person, however, to live a more moderated life than the hardcore, right-wing, Catholic doctrine suggests. Certainly, there is a tension there. But there is a difference in one’s relationship to God and one’s relationship to others in the world. This, then, is related to the second and third below:
Second, apparently you and many others don’t know what being a “cradle Catholic” means. (I am NOT one; but I think I have a better understanding of it by being Catholic at all, and from having studied the history of it.) I don’t know you, so I cannot give you an analogy that I know you can connect with. Your own identity with your family, perhaps?
Third, Catholicism is similar in some respects, but also quite different from other religions; in part because it has been around for a VERY long time–by comparison, since just a little time after Jesus’ actual life on earth; and so, like Judaism, centuries before anything named “protestant” or “evangelical” were even thought of. Even Muslims take the Old Testament as their own, and came into existence some 600 years after Jesus died. This makes a huge difference, however.
But to this: “Why don’t Dems at least try to tell the public the truth, America and Americans are under attack from theocracy?”
. . . probably because we are not . . . because having religious foundations is far FAR from being all bad, as you seem to think, despite what GregB says about that.
But I’ve argued that before here . . . about oligarchs . . . about the obvious conflict between Jesus’ NT teachings and “fake-Catholics” who embrace neo-liberalism, using their Catholic credentials to hide what is nothing less than their greedy intentions . . . and/or their being just more useful idiots and throwaway enablers, to oligarchs’ desires and fears. CBK
Linda FYI I responded to your questions with the assumption that you are being genuine in asking them, but it went to moderation. CBK
What’s my point? Mine is that there are many different political opinions among Catholics. Some are conservative. Some are liberal. Yet when I or Linda make the same argument, we are deemed “anti-Catholic.” I don’t understand the selection outrage about truthful statements.
GregB I cannot speak for Diane; however, . . . and I’ve said this before, more than once and given explanations . . . your complaint in your posts suggest to me that you are misreading my posts. Is it intentional? I won’t repeat them here, but will ask that if you want to understand, reread my posts. CBK
We agree.
Diane and GregB My responses and claims to the presence of anti-Catholicism were not to GregB but to Linda. It’s about her constant barrage, where all things bad in almost every new issue are related back Catholicism in some way. She seems to play “gotcha” with every bad actor about their religious background.
Also, GregB doesn’t seem to understand that claim is, again, not to him, or about the facts of many of Linda’s posts–again, some are quite correct . . . though her earlier omission about Pennsylvania statistics should give us all pause when she makes vague but suggestive references about Catholic influences in the future. It’s overdone and speak less of informing others here than of anti-Catholic/religious bias and even zealotry on the level of her own accusations about others.
Here is but one example of a recent post of mine to another writer here about the point that GregB seems to continually overlook: Thanks, Catherine
MY EARLIER POST:
“Even correct facts give a distorted impression, and even hurt the truth of one’s own argument (The Church, indeed, is in need of criticism), when piled on, over and over a gain, presented as abstractions and out-of-context, and brought up in almost every new post regardless.
“I’m still wondering if we are going to hear statistics about Catholic voting that were presented recently as if they were national statistics; when (in another note here) the question was raised by someone else about their being statistics from one state/Pennsylvania with a potentially questionable source. If so, it’s a ‘convenient’ but misleading omission . . . added to the pile of Linda’s anti-Catholic messages.
“Regardless, and thankfully, two other writers here put even those statistics into their broader context of Catholics leaving the Church and other relevant data. But again, I appreciate your concern.” CBK
I just think it’s outrageous that the US Department of Education spends so much time bashing public schools.
I don’t think the public signed on to fund an agency that seems to spend every working hour pushing private schools and private school students as innately superior to public schools and public school students.
I’m sick of paying thousands of public employees to return NO value to the schools 90% of students attend.
We already have thousands of privately funded ed reformers to act as full time professional critics of the public schools they oppose and hope to replace with privatized systems. I have no idea why I need an entire public payroll doing the same thing.
Most students attend public schools and so did and do most of the public. We should think about hiring some people who intend to perform some actual work on behalf of the 90%. Demand more. Insist they return some value for what you’re paying them.
I know they oppose the existence of our schools and have very low opinions of our students. I wasn’t aware I was paying them to work full time on expressing their disdain and contempt.
In Ohio, business owners (less than $200,000 income) aren’t paying for the state Fordham/Paola DeMario Department of Ed. The GOP exempted the businesses from taxation a couple of years ago. The irony is that the Chamber of Commerce makes comments about the “failure” of schools while a large swath of their members pay nothing for the schools their employees attended.
Of course with Covid’s mismanagement by the GOP president, many of those small businesses won’t be paying taxes because they are in severely reduced circumstances- cosmic justice
Correction- DeMaria
Fordham’s top management- Mike Petrili and Robert Pondiscio
Ohio promoters of school choice- two state Sen. Huffmans (first cousins- one of whom made a racist comment in a capitol hearing)
The overwhelming amount of voucher money in Ohio goes to Catholic schools.
No inference intended by the following– a recent poll indicated that 69% of practicing Catholics are supporters of the (grifting) Trump administration (and, by extension DeVos).
Build a Wall between Church and State
Build a wall to separate
The mingling of church and state
Make the Secretaries pay
Stable genius Donald’s way
Matthew 6 vs 5-7
Matthew 6 vs 5-7
Maybe, the Secretary of Education
post should be abolished. 🤓✔️❗🔔
Here’s some typical “work” from the Trump Administration:
https://blog.ed.gov/2020/09/it-feels-so-good-to-be-in-school/
Yet another marketing campaign for private schools. The public is paying thousands of public employees to promote ed reform’s war against the schools 90% of children attend.
No positive or practical contributions at all- public school students exist in order to compare them unfavorably to private school students.
It’s ludicrous. We have an entrenched echo chamber of people in government who don’t support public schools or public school students and refuse to perform any work at all on their behalf. We’re all funding this. There is no functional difference between the US Department of Education and the ed reform charter/voucher lobby. They’re the same entity, except you’re all paying for one of the two.
Just a heads up- the ed reform echo chamber are currently all cheerleading “pods” and “microschools”. As usual, they exaggerate the wonderfulness of these approaches and wildly over-sell:
https://www.azcentral.com/restricted/?return=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.azcentral.com%2Fstory%2Fnews%2Flocal%2Farizona-education%2F2020%2F09%2F18%2Fprenda-microschools-education-funding-charter-private-schools-covid-19-pandemic%2F5751442002%2F
Like all ed reform initiatives, the reality does not match what they’re selling to the rubes.
CORRUPTION IN PROCESS:
:News Alert/Sept. 21, 12:28 p.m. EDT/
The Washington Post
“CDC removes statement on airborne virus transmission, claiming website error”
“The agency had posted new guidelines suggesting the virus can transmit over a distance larger than six feet and that indoor ventilation is key to protection against its spread. This is a point that many independent experts have also been advancing, and it had appeared that the agency had come around to their point of view.
“But the guidelines were removed late this morning because “that does not reflect our current state of knowledge,” a top CDC official said.”
Trump didn’t want the CDC to admit that the virus is airborne.
We can no longer trust the CDC.
Diane Just more evidence of the breakdown of democratic institutions that are there to serve the public’s interests rather than Trump or the R’s.
Also, no one has mentioned his constant attack on the whole idea of DUE PROCESS.
One can read about the absence of due process in any history of Nazism, or Stalinism and the gulags. Without due process, a neighbor can hold a grudge against you, whisper rumors to the local powers, and VOILA! you either die or spend the next 10 years in jail. (I’ve read about the gulags . . . that’s not an exaggeration.) CBK
Diane The Trumpists don’t want the CDC or any other public-oriented institution to survive anyway (like the USPO, or public health or education), sooooo . . . if the playbook operates rightly, discredit it FIRST, then the public will see that it isn’t working, and it will tend to go away on its own. That first step is in-process as we speak. CBK
This just makes me cry.
And what about WHO? They also have been ignoring the studies on aerosolized spread…
bethree5 It’s a difference kind of disease, but a disease nevertheless. EVERYTHING is seen through a political lens . . . . CBK
OK, I’m done crying already. Because science—facts—will out. Covid could give a crap what the US pols are saying. Our own hospitals are up to date & ignore the pols: their safety protocols show us what works. Those countries that observe the science are already modifying their reopening and safety protocols. They will leave us in their dust. Their economies will slowly, gradually, surely restart long before ours (or Brazil’s) do.
And, counterintuitively, our people are also not—at least not entirely—stupid. This boneheaded move by Trump admin [surely who’s behind it] will only serve to exacerbate our already huge public distrust in our federal govt & observe the political corruption of its institutions. Folks will look to the governors of their own states for guidance, as the fed govt has already made itself clear they abandon all leadership to the states. Even those w/Trump dittohead govrs will follow the covid case stats, draw their own conclusions, & venture out to school or biz w/ great hesitation. Which will continue to cripple the economy. Keep it up, Trump, you’re timing is perfect: it’s just another nail in your coffin.
Interesting articles being written about the undoing of William B. Crews, Red State editor, former military and, current employee in Fauci’s press department.
Out of curiosity, I read the Sept. 2020 twitter feed of Streiff, aka William B. Crews.
Fr. Thomas Petri had added a comment to the feed.
Petri has a page at the D.C. Catholic Information Center, a politically-connected right wing organization. He is also a co-host of a program on the religious radio station, EWTN. A quote by Petri was featured at the Catholic Vote site in 2016, “To Senator Tim Kaine, Do us both a favor. Don’t line up I’m my communion line…It’d be embarrassing for both of us.”
In a later issue, Catholic Vote praised Hungary’s right wing authoritarian strong man, Orban.
Joe Biden is Catholic.
Nancy Pelosi is Catholic.
Tim Kaine is Catholic.
Diane I have often stated here that the deeper problem is with a fascist/oligarchy and that, the Catholic hierarchy that Linda writes about are either (1) useful idiots, or (2) hiding their greed behind their Catholic or other-religious front.
In that vein, I offer the below two papers I found on the Federalist Society’s website which, in my view, suggest that self-dealing at the legislative level of government is and has long-been an aim of this group who CLAIMS to support the Constitution. One clue: they want to get rid of C-SPAN . . . no public oversight for them.
For the Catholics who are members of the FS group, I suggest this: if you want to be “originalists,” you need to return to the New Testament. Voila! Instant democratic-progressives! Alas, references to “possible improvement” in the second document below is code for “get rid of.” CBK
https://fedsoc.org/commentary/fedsoc-blog/the-irresponsibility-of-the-socially-responsible-corporation
“The Irresponsibility of the Socially Responsible Corporation | The Federalist Society
“The fiduciary duties of corporate directors and officers require that they always act in a responsible manner to promote the best interests of their corporation and its shareholders, and never act to promote their personal interests, or the interests of third parties, that are inconsistent with the best interests of their corporation and its shareholders.”fedsoc.org
https://fedsoc.org/projects/regulatory-transparency-project
“The Regulatory Transparency Project promotes a national conversation about the benefits and costs of federal, state, and local regulatory policies and explores areas for possible improvement.”
fedsoc.org
If (big IF) Trump manages to pull off his attempt to take over the United States and turn it into a dystopian dictatorship, Betsy the Beast DeVos would be a perfect selection to run Trump’s extermination camps to get rid of all minorites, liberals and progressives.
If successful, in the end, the population of the US would drop from more than 320 million to less than 80 million.
Hard to accept the fact that almost 250 million Americans would go quietly into the gas chambers.
Aerial surveillance and drones may accomplish the unthinkable. Burying your own dead clarifies the risk of dissent.
No offense meant.
The dollar that pays states to allocate to public schools says “in God we trust”.
There is no full seperation of church and state because of the U. S. Dollar which is religiously affiliated. The paycheck of state, is quite religious.
Signed
http://www.welovetheoldestparents.com
The logo on the dollar does not imply that the federal government is underwriting the cost of churches and religious schools.