Trump will eliminate the department of education. Schools telling history that America was built by slaves on stolen land won't receive money

[Uachet]

So what, we should wait for them to pull the trigger instead of putting people into power that are explicitly against ending the DoE?

There are a handful of GOP holdouts that would not vote to dissolve the DoE, and that's why it hasn't gotten done.

Threats are still threats, acted on or not.

No, you vote against him if that is what you fear. This fear-mongering though will not work on anyone who has seen the history of this play out over and over.

I am pointing out it is not really a valid fear based on history, but if you want to fear it go ahead and do so.

 

[Adeptus Astartes]

No, you vote against him if that is what you fear. This fear-mongering though will not work on anyone who has seen the history of this play out over and over.

I am pointing out it is not really a valid fear based on history, but if you want to fear it go ahead and do so.

People downplayed threats about Roe until it happened, but go ahead and call it fearmongering if it helps your ego.

 

[Uachet]

How is this even the same thing? Y'all are way to busy trying to "both sides" everything that you are missing the bigger picture.

The framing that he refused to do it is extremely misleading. At the time, Roe was firmly established precedent, especially after decades of Supreme Court rulings that reaffirmed it. He likely looked at the Court's makeup during his first term and saw it as relatively stable, with Roe considered settled law. This perception likely gave him reason to believe that abortion rights were not in immediate danger. Given that perception, codifying Roe into law wasn't seen as an urgent fight, given the protections already in place under the judicial precedent. Instead, Obama used his political capital on the central issue of his campaign - healthcare reform. He expended his influence and legislative resources, particularly when navigating through Congress.

Codifying Roe would likely have sparked an immediate and intense partisan fight, potentially undermining efforts to secure healthcare reform, which was already facing strong opposition from Republicans and Blue Dog Democrats.

In hindsight, it's clear that he underestimated the long-term threat to Roe posed by changes in the Supreme Court. However, his decision was shaped by the political realities of the time, where he made the calculation that getting healthcare done would have a more immediate impact.

It demonstrates how you are not really that different from your opposition. Voting on the desire of something happening, but each time your party is in power it does not happen. You are unable to see the similarity because you are blinded by Blue just like they are blinded by Red.

You are mirror images of each other but are not aware enough to notice it. Allowing the Party you support to use a issue over and over again to garner your votes, to make you hope, or to make you fear an outcome. You can see it when they make Republicans scared of an issue, but you can't see it when Democrats do the same to you.

 

[Uachet]

People downplayed threats about Roe until it happened, but go ahead and call it fearmongering if it helps your ego.

Yet, in that fear of it happening, the Democrats never fixed it. They used it to garner votes every election cycle but never fixed it when they had the power to do it.

 

[Pull Up the Roots]

"Education Department spokesperson Angela Morabito, however, noted that DeVos’ Title IX sexual misconduct rule has withstood legal challenges. The rule codifies sexual harassment “as the sex-based discrimination that it is” and legally requires K-12 schools to respond when any employee has notice of sexual misconduct, she said."



That is her lasting legacy, that will require effort to overturn. The rest was reverted pretty much as soon as she was out of office. She is considered the worst Education secretary, but that does not change the fact that they could have removed the department and placed it back under its original umbrella department plenty of times. They choose not to when the opportunity is there.

I am not going to get all rhilled up by something they have demonstrated in the past they will not do. I prefer to concern myself with issues they have shown a history of actually enacting. Like choosing conservative judges. They have done that every time they have had the chance, and I expect Kamala to do the same since Democrats have done it every chance available (but Obama). I want her to do that, so I am voting for her. I expect nothing else from her, but her constant word-salad talking points.

That's exactly the problem, you're dismissing the larger issue because you think it's not 'likely' to happen. Just because they haven't removed the department yet doesn't mean the constant sabotage isn't working. The real danger isn't in some dramatic dismantling overnight; it's in the slow, deliberate undermining that makes people lose faith in these institutions, so that when the time comes, removing them becomes acceptable. You can't just ignore how this kind of destabilization erodes public trust, leaving the door wide open for even worse policies in the future.

It demonstrates how you are not really that different from your opposition. Voting on the desire of something happening, but each time your party is in power it does not happen. You are unable to see the similarity because you are blinded by Blue just like they are blinded by Red.

You are mirror images of each other but are not aware enough to notice it. Allowing the Party you support to use a issue over and over again to garner your votes, to make you hope, or to make you fear an outcome. You can see it when they make Republicans scared of an issue, but you can't see it when Democrats do the same to you.

Sorry, but if this is your takeaway from everything I said, then you are not seriously engaging with what I am saying. And I'm just going to go play some Path of Exile.

 

[Uachet]

That's exactly the problem, you're dismissing the larger issue because you think it's not 'likely' to happen. Just because they haven't removed the department yet doesn't mean the constant sabotage isn't working. The real danger isn't in some dramatic dismantling overnight; it's in the slow, deliberate undermining that makes people lose faith in these institutions, so that when the time comes, removing them becomes acceptable. You can't just ignore how this kind of destabilization erodes public trust, leaving the door wide open for even worse policies in the future.

Yes, I am dismissing that issue. I am not going to worry about an issue that seems to be forgotten every time the side that brings up the issue has the power to do something about it. I rather focus on issues that have a history of being acted on. I don't fear a promise that has been made over and over again since I was 10 years old, but never followed through for over 44 years.

 

[OperationNumbNutts]

In other words, Trump is validating Project 2025.

 

[BaileyPark31]

Schools aren’t funded by federal taxes tho

The Legal processes for special needs students is regulated by the DOE.

the most vulnerable kids would be at risk for complete failure

 

[JLova]

This is the last gasp for white people.

 

[BaileyPark31]

I mean what exactly does he want to take away word for word?


Schools taught Slavery, Jim Crow, and the Civil Rights Activist period. He wants to erase that from the textbooks or is it something more? What are schools teaching now that's different from what we learned?

As far as I'm concerned there are no history books or teachers saying "America was built by slaves on stolen land". You get the very basics and that's it. There's no Black Wall Street teachings.

I went to a school in a vast majority wyte public school district in PA. We did learn about Tulsa, BWS, and some other stuff.

And that's the problem. There's no nationwide consistency and some school boards are trash.

 

[MoshpitMazi]

That

Y'all support the department of education being in Washington? .
That seems effective to you? So the education of little Sally in Idaho needs to be wired through Washington? This helps the kid? That's the most efficient way to go about meeting her needs directly

Or y'all want to worship bureaucracy some more?

The public education system is merely an intersection of a job's program, daycare and indoctrination center

I bet the first person to have an emotional response to this will neg me but they also probably repeat things like "we need to better fund our education system" - they repeat things and then never think beyond the surface level, I mean ... Why should they, the consensus method they live by already verifies the position ... We need to spend more on education right?

Ranked first in spending and ranked last in the top 40

That's effective to you

Send more money to Washington brehs

That'll help

Saying a lot of nothing. Just p*ssy talk

We should be teaching Black kids in private schools instead.

Paid for by who? Lmao

 

[diggy]

Man said new history, lmao, like that ain't the OG history

 

[BaileyPark31]

We should be teaching Black kids in private schools instead.

We should be teaching black kids at home.

 

[I Really Mean It]

there is going to be a whole lot of violence if this nazi is elected.

 

[Towlie]

Schools aren’t funded by federal taxes tho

There's tons of federal funding in schools. I am a CTE teacher (career technical education) in NC and every CTE teacher is federally funded. We have multiple CTE teachers in every middle and high school in the district

Our school is title 1 (federal funds) and every child gets free lunch and breakfast, from federal funds

I was also a special education teacher before CTE and IDEA (special education federal laws ) is funded federally