What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Betsy Devos....probably going to need her own thread. (1 Viewer)

Terrific. I'm sure she's pleasant and western MI is a nice place. This is America. Not everyone is CR. Some people are Jewish. Some people are atheist. Some people are African American. Some people don't come from money. I'd prefer someone more in touch with everyone, a pillar of public education who understands the important separation between church and state. I'm not interested in Betsy's way, I'm sure it worked great for her. Frankly it's a disgusting pick and these aren't the people I want in my daughter's education in the slightest way. 
I kind of disagree with this. 

From what tri-man 47 wrote, this woman sounds like a good person with good intent. That's important to me; it's half the battle right there. So while I don't like her politics and ideas, and I am still very concerned about her level of preparedness, I feel better about this pick than I did. She may listen to those who work under her. She may learn a few things. She may change her mind about a few things. She means to do the right thing. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I kind of disagree with this. 

From what tri-man 47 wrote, this woman sounds like a good person with good intent. That's important to me; it's half the battle right there. So while I don't like her politics and ideas, and I am still very concerned about her level of preparedness, I feel better about this pick than I did. She may listen to those who work under her. She may learn a few things. She may change her mind about a few things. She means to do the right thing. 
She's a diehard religious fundamentalist Tim. That doesn't exactly equate to listening and having an open mind.

 
She's a diehard religious fundamentalist Tim. That doesn't exactly equate to listening and having an open mind.
Again, I disagree. I've met some that are. I've met some progressives with very closed minds. It really depends on the personality of the person. 

A religious fundamentalist has a closed mind about religion but not necessarily on other subjects. 

 
Without googling, who the frock knows who served as the secretary of ed during most of Obama's term and what the heck he accomplished?   I did not think so.  The doom and gloom here is humorous.  

 
Again, I disagree. I've met some that are. I've met some progressives with very closed minds. It really depends on the personality of the person. 

A religious fundamentalist has a closed mind about religion but not necessarily on other subjects. 
I am really glad to see you are not blindly accepting the stereotypes being thrown around and over the top fear-mongering.   

 
I am really glad to see you are not blindly accepting the stereotypes being thrown around and over the top fear-mongering.   
Thanks but don't get me wrong: if all she does is try to dismantle the department she is running while promoting private schools, I'm not going to be happy about that. 

 
Thanks but don't get me wrong: if all she does is try to dismantle the department she is running while promoting private schools, I'm not going to be happy about that. 
she won't dismantle the DoE.  But she may continue to do what Obama's secretary of ed did, promote charter schools.   He was not a popular choice of the teacher unions, but the sky did not fall.  

 
Without googling, who the frock knows who served as the secretary of ed during most of Obama's term and what the heck he accomplished?   I did not think so.  The doom and gloom here is humorous.  
Sort of like a referee. I don't want to know they are there. If I start to know them it means they are doing a terrible job.

 
If religious schools funded by the government happens, I can't wait to see the shock when all the government funded Islamic schools pop up. 
Those schools will be exempt because they don't believe in Jesus, or God, and they'll be kicked out of the country so it won't matter.

 
It depends on where you live.  Teachers salaries in CA are $70K on average with great benefits, pension, and the obvious time off.  That's easily the equivalent of a six figure private job... for the average teacher.  I expect you would be higher.
My wife is a teacher here in the Bay Area and has a masters degree.  She does not earn $70k, has terrible benefits and works during the summer to bring in a little extra money.  As for the pension, she pays for it out of her paycheck, and probably contributes more per paycheck than most of the pension complainers contribute to their 401ks.  She used to be in one of the mid-tier districts as far as pay goes, but her wages have been stagnant, and have actually gone down over the past number of years as the increase in healthcare has outpaced any raises.  Not sure if other areas work like this, but to move to a better paying district she actually needs to take a pay cut for about 6 years before she will be back to where she is now.

Our house is under 1200 square feet and would probably sell for $700k.  Our neighbor's house rents for $3200 per month.  If you listen to conservative radio even in this area you would think teachers are scamming society out of all their hard earned money when in reality it's almost impossible to live on a teacher's salary here.

 
Haven't read the entire thread so I'm sure most of this has been covered, but from a public school admin, these are my problems with her appointment:

- She has 0 experience in public education or education administration of any form. Imagine having the head person of your field having the only qualification of donating a bunch of money to the Republican party (200 mil) and a life's work of undermining the very department she is taking control of.  As a dedicated career educator, a person that spends 60+ hours per week in a public school, it is a slap in the face.  

- Her lack of experience leads to a lack of knowledge of important topics in education.  She was unaware that IDEA was a piece of federal legislation that requires free and equitable access to education for students with disabilities. That is a fairly important piece of legislation (a fairly good chunk of federal funding for schools comes from this) and not anything new or groundbreaking (passed in early 90's I think, updating a bill from the 70's).  EVERY person in public education should know about IDEA, especially the head woman in charge.  

- She supports giving public funding to charter/private schools without holding them to the same regulations and accountability standards as public schools.  When asked directly if she believed in equal accountability for all schools receiving federal funding, her response was "I believe in accountability."  The senator that asked the question pressed and repeated "equal accountability" and she replied "I believe in accountability".  To me, this is like having a basketball game where one team doesn't have to dribble and gets 4 points for every basket.  

- Having her hearing before her conflict of interests were checked by the Ethics committee is a joke.  (Of course the whole hearing is a joke because she will get 52 votes regardless of what comes out of the hearing).  She has so many ties to the for-profit charter school industry, I find it hard to believe she will not be conflicted.  Of course she is only taking $1 for salary so that makes it ok...

 
Haven't read the entire thread so I'm sure most of this has been covered, but from a public school admin, these are my problems with her appointment:

- She has 0 experience in public education or education administration of any form. Imagine having the head person of your field having the only qualification of donating a bunch of money to the Republican party (200 mil) and a life's work of undermining the very department she is taking control of.  As a dedicated career educator, a person that spends 60+ hours per week in a public school, it is a slap in the face.  

- Her lack of experience leads to a lack of knowledge of important topics in education.  She was unaware that IDEA was a piece of federal legislation that requires free and equitable access to education for students with disabilities. That is a fairly important piece of legislation (a fairly good chunk of federal funding for schools comes from this) and not anything new or groundbreaking (passed in early 90's I think, updating a bill from the 70's).  EVERY person in public education should know about IDEA, especially the head woman in charge.  

- She supports giving public funding to charter/private schools without holding them to the same regulations and accountability standards as public schools.  When asked directly if she believed in equal accountability for all schools receiving federal funding, her response was "I believe in accountability."  The senator that asked the question pressed and repeated "equal accountability" and she replied "I believe in accountability".  To me, this is like having a basketball game where one team doesn't have to dribble and gets 4 points for every basket.  

- Having her hearing before her conflict of interests were checked by the Ethics committee is a joke.  (Of course the whole hearing is a joke because she will get 52 votes regardless of what comes out of the hearing).  She has so many ties to the for-profit charter school industry, I find it hard to believe she will not be conflicted.  Of course she is only taking $1 for salary so that makes it ok...
Do you think she is philosophically different than Arne  Duncan?  

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'm gone for a day and the liberals have started yet another thread where they have simply gone bat-#### crazy.  Wow you guys have lost it.

You're simply out of control.  Seriously, you need to chill.  It's not the end of the world.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So long story short, anyone with ties to the teachers union dislikes her, and anyone who believes in parents having a choice of schools to send their children to adores her.  

She's a fantastic choice and will likely bring true reform to a broken system.

 
Do you think she is philosophically different than Arne  Duncan?  
Yes. Duncan was pro charter and choice but was also heavily in favor of accountability. Duncan also never would have said it's up to the States if they want keep students with IEPs out of charters.  He was pro inclusion.

I didn't like Duncan at all either. I think both parties are a bit clueless when it comes to education. 

 
Last edited by a moderator:
So long story short, anyone with ties to the teachers union dislikes her, and anyone who believes in parents having a choice of schools to send their children to adores her.  

She's a fantastic choice and will likely bring true reform to a broken system.
That is not true. I have ties to the teachers union and am mostly pro choice. My issue is with the system she has created in Michigan where for profit charters get tax money and are allowed to operate without accountability. 

 
You're simply out of control.  Seriously, you need to chill.  It's not the end of the world.
Said everyone to conservatives who thought an Obama presidency was the end of the world.  Yet we still got 8 straight years of crying and lies and fear mongering.  Now the same people who cried the loudest have the audacity to tell everyone to calm down and support our president.  So laughable.  

 
Haven't read the entire thread so I'm sure most of this has been covered, but from a public school admin, these are my problems with her appointment:

- She has 0 experience in public education or education administration of any form. Imagine having the head person of your field having the only qualification of donating a bunch of money to the Republican party (200 mil) and a life's work of undermining the very department she is taking control of.  As a dedicated career educator, a person that spends 60+ hours per week in a public school, it is a slap in the face.  

- Her lack of experience leads to a lack of knowledge of important topics in education.  She was unaware that IDEA was a piece of federal legislation that requires free and equitable access to education for students with disabilities. That is a fairly important piece of legislation (a fairly good chunk of federal funding for schools comes from this) and not anything new or groundbreaking (passed in early 90's I think, updating a bill from the 70's).  EVERY person in public education should know about IDEA, especially the head woman in charge.  

- She supports giving public funding to charter/private schools without holding them to the same regulations and accountability standards as public schools.  When asked directly if she believed in equal accountability for all schools receiving federal funding, her response was "I believe in accountability."  The senator that asked the question pressed and repeated "equal accountability" and she replied "I believe in accountability".  To me, this is like having a basketball game where one team doesn't have to dribble and gets 4 points for every basket.  

- Having her hearing before her conflict of interests were checked by the Ethics committee is a joke.  (Of course the whole hearing is a joke because she will get 52 votes regardless of what comes out of the hearing).  She has so many ties to the for-profit charter school industry, I find it hard to believe she will not be conflicted.  Of course she is only taking $1 for salary so that makes it ok...
Her position on IDEA enforcement  was a new one. Definitely a big advantage for charter schools if they can deny students with disabilities. Those students are incredibly expensive and drag down test scores. 

 
Said everyone to conservatives who thought an Obama presidency was the end of the world.  Yet we still got 8 straight years of crying and lies and fear mongering.  Now the same people who cried the loudest have the audacity to tell everyone to calm down and support our president.  So laughable.  
Even on our worst day it was absolutely nothing like what we're seeing now after Hillary's loss.  This is simply out of control.  You guys need to find another hobby.

 
So long story short, anyone with ties to the teachers union dislikes her, and anyone who believes in parents having a choice of schools to send their children to adores her.  

She's a fantastic choice and will likely bring true reform to a broken system.
What qualifications does she have that make her a fantastic choice?  She's anti-teachers union and pro-parent choice? There are lots of more qualified people that fall into that category.  Maybe not many that have donated hundreds of millions to the party, but I'm told that didn't have anything to do with her nomination.  

 
I'm gone for a day and the liberals have started yet another thread where they have simply gone bat-#### crazy.  Wow you guys have lost it.

You're simply out of control.  Seriously, you need to chill.  It's not the end of the world.
Is this the type of post that adds to Amy discussion and does anything accept paint a group of individuals with a broad brush?  The type of thing that keeps getting threads deleted...

 
It's not the end of the world.
I understand it is not the end of the world.  I understand that in all reality the education secretary is probably going to have very little actual impact. "It's not the end of the world" is not exactly a very high standard though, and not sure if that qualifies as making America great. 

 
Is this the type of post that adds to Amy discussion and does anything accept paint a group of individuals with a broad brush?  The type of thing that keeps getting threads deleted...
If only you went after your fellow lefties with as much zeal as you go after conservatives about their posts.  Because if you DID do that, you would see that about 90% of the posts in here do nothing to advance the discussion (including yours).

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Even on our worst day it was absolutely nothing like what we're seeing now after Hillary's loss.  This is simply out of control.  You guys need to find another hobby.
I don't think you've bothered to read the thread, Max. Most of the posts have been reasonably critical of Devos IMO, both about her positions and her qualifications.

 
Her position on IDEA enforcement  was a new one. Definitely a big advantage for charter schools if they can deny students with disabilities. Those students are incredibly expensive and drag down test scores. 
Pretty sure her position on IDEA was an ignorant one (she actually said later that she didn't realize it was a federal law and since it was would have to be followed) and one that cannot stand up to any legal action...

 
If only you went after your fellow lefties with as much zeal as you go after conservatives about their posts.  Because if you DID do that, you would see that about 90% of the posts in here do nothing to advance the discussion (including yours).
If only you would actually reply to the topic at hand instead of trolling...How about adding to the discussion by telling us why De Vos should be education secretary?

 
Pretty sure her position on IDEA was an ignorant one (she actually said later that she didn't realize it was a federal law and since it was would have to be followed) and one that cannot stand up to any legal action...
That's good, I hadn't seen that. Crazy she wasn't aware of it. That's pretty much the biggest thing the federal government has done as it relates to education ever. 

 
If only you would actually reply to the topic at hand instead of trolling...How about adding to the discussion by telling us why De Vos should be education secretary?
I'm not sure what the topic is.  It appears to be "Trump supporters are morons" or "Trump supporters are inbred" or "Trump supporters will fill all the low-educated jobs".  Which one is it?

 
Again, the sad thing to me is that the hearings are a complete farce.  There is no question that could be asked nor any answer that she could give that would result in her getting less than 52 votes.  When every single republican senator thinks (or at least votes) that she is the best candidate for the job and every single democrat thinks/votes she is not, there is a systematic problem (from both sides).  A few months ago (during the primaries and even into the general election), you couldn't find 52 senators that agreed on anything.  Now it's back to everybody play nice...everybody walks the party line instead of actually doing what they think is right or what is best for our kids. 

 
I'm not sure what the topic is.  It appears to be "Trump supporters are morons" or "Trump supporters are inbred" or "Trump supporters will fill all the low-educated jobs".  Which one is it?
Why do you think Betsy DeVos should be education secretary?  That is the topic.  I put it as the first sentence this time because apparently that is as far as you got on my last post.  

 
I'm not sure what the topic is.  It appears to be "Trump supporters are morons" or "Trump supporters are inbred" or "Trump supporters will fill all the low-educated jobs".  Which one is it?
This has been a pretty reasonable thread IMO. Not much name calling when we stayed on the topic of education/Devos. There was an awful detour on vaccines or something. That was brutal. 

 
I'm disappointed Trump appointed anyone.  I was hoping he would just shut down the joke that is the Education Department.  How much money do we have to throw down that rat hole with no results?  The whole thing has been nothing but an expensive sop to the teacher's unions.  And somehow we survived and prospered for 200 years without a freaking federal education boondoggle.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's good, I hadn't seen that. Crazy she wasn't aware of it. That's pretty much the biggest thing the federal government has done as it relates to education ever. 
Indeed.  Educators here are basically required to take entire graduate level classes on just this piece of legislation to receive degrees. 

 
So long story short, anyone with ties to the teachers union dislikes her, and anyone who believes in parents having a choice of schools to send their children to adores her.  

She's a fantastic choice and will likely bring true reform to a broken system.
How do you think the system is broken, and how do you think she is a good fit to solve it?  Doesn't everyone have a choice of schools now?

For the record I don't think our system is perfect, and have my own thoughts that would probably be counter to the bulk of the teachers union.  I don't think what I have heard from her is good for education in our country.

 
I'm disappointed Trump appointed anyone.  I was hoping he would just shut down the joke that is the Education Department.  How much money do we have to throw down that rat hole with no results?  The whole thing has been nothing but an expensive sop to the teacher's unions.  And somehow we survived and prospered for 200 years without a freaking federal education boondoggle.
Hyperbole much? I do agree that a lot of money has been thrown around without the intended (although I wouldn't say anywhere close to zero) results.  Like most government sectors, there is a quite a bit of waste in the Education Department.  For example, a huge amount of federal grant money goes to people who make a living by developing unnecessary programs, seemingly simply to justify their own salaries. Not nearly enough of that money makes it to teachers and most importantly students.   

 
I'm disappointed Trump appointed anyone.  I was hoping he would just shut down the joke that is the Education Department.  How much money do we have to throw down that rat hole with no results?  The whole thing has been nothing but an expensive sop to the teacher's unions.  And somehow we survived and prospered for 200 years without a freaking federal education boondoggle.
I understand the idea of shutting down the whole department and turning over to the States. I'm not opposed to that depending how it's set up. I just disagree with the rest of your post. The Fed Dept of Ed is not in line with teachers unions. The unions didn't like most of what Obama's admin pushed through. Also to say we did fine with education in the 1800s without them is to be a bit simplistic. Schools then did fine without computers or chemistry or teaching disabled people, etc. The world,economy, labor landscape and world education is much larger and more complex than it was in 1900.

 
I kind of disagree with this. 

From what tri-man 47 wrote, this woman sounds like a good person with good intent. That's important to me; it's half the battle right there. So while I don't like her politics and ideas, and I am still very concerned about her level of preparedness, I feel better about this pick than I did. She may listen to those who work under her. She may learn a few things. She may change her mind about a few things. She means to do the right thing. 
Well, she could learn a thing or two about the Establishment Clause and Free Exercise Clause of First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, and perhaps read up on its impact on Everson v. Board of Education. I've been fortunate to have been around public educators my whole life who have done nothing but toil for peanuts for the betterment of education for all races and religions. I find an Amway shill to be a pathetic excuse, and the head of that slimy pyramid scheme whose only qualifications for DoE are donating $200M to Trump can stay the heck out of my state as far as I'm concerned and I wish her a good day then.

 
I'm not sure what the topic is.  It appears to be "Trump supporters are morons" or "Trump supporters are inbred" or "Trump supporters will fill all the low-educated jobs".  Which one is it?
Leave it to Max to jump into a thread without reading anything and decry that everyone who supports Trump is a racist.  The only thing missing is pointing out that whoever Clinton nominated would have been worse.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top