Blogcritics Comments on Sarah's Standup Debate

Comment by Heloise on Sarah's Standup Debate

Fri, 17 Oct 2008 19:36:45 EDT

Palin Alert: she is doing Saturday Night Live SNL for real this Saturday! She said she has not seen a script yet. Is she kidding? She and gramps don't need a script. Did you see him last night at the Smith dinner? Like I said he and Sarah are both screams, living hysterical standups. And guess what Sarah (yes, Heloise to Sarah Palin) comedians make millions when they go on the road. So when Alaska kicks you to the curb you can dust yourself off and go on the road and make loads of money with Joe and Suzy six pack who want to see you. I prefer black comedians. Heloise Thanks bro in law for your comment...I think. But I too grew up in Chicago.

Comment by Bro in Law on Sarah's Standup Debate

Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:10:47 EDT

Heloise Stop hating on Chicago. Admittedly it is still probably the most segregated city in the world, the housing for black folks near Downtown is still being razed to make way for yuppies, and Mayor Daley is still running things and working on bringing the Olympics here. But I was born and raised here, attended public schools, worked in the public schools and sent my kids to public schools and we're still alive and kicking. Love your analysis and comments on the election drama though.

Comment by Heloise on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 20:40:47 EDT

People don't get Chicago. It is THE RADICAL city. You have what we called the "plantation politics" and Mayor Daily on one side and everyone must kow tow to the Daily Machine, no matter who you are if you want to win. We called it Mayor daily because he had been mayor for so many decades now followed by his son. But what I hate: that they have turned Chicago in a sanctuary city. Growing up we NEVER saw a Mexican. No kidding. Didn't know they existed until I went to college in California. Then there are the radical fronts that are born, bred and raised in Chicago. Must be something in the water. As a young teen I used to go to meetings with my aunt (my New Orleans family was intrumental in electing the first black mayor of NOLA, as I helped Harold W. get elected in Chicago) of something called the "Topographical society" could not find it on the Web because it is defunct. What was the purpose of the TS? Simple, since black people (poor and middle class) all lived along the Dan (Damn) ryan on the SS of chicago, we felt a conspiracy afoot. Blacks believed that the tanks would one day swoop down on all black people and exterminate them because we/they were sitting ducks! But guess what happened instead? Most of the projects along the Ryan have been imploded and black people were summarily moved out of beautiful Chicago to make way for you guessed it: flippers, and high-end real estate. They were booted to the poor ass burbs of further south Chicago. It was dramatic and traumatic. Chicago has become a haven for yuppies. But why is Chicago so rad? Esteemed sociologists whose lectures I would attend, for fun, pointed out and documented that little ole Chicago was the MOST segregated city in the WHOLE world. He included the apartheid of south Africa. This was in the late 1980s. The other thing I did for fun was following quantum physics. I used to go the U. Of Chicago and listen to the Nobel prize winners in physics. Never ran into Obama or Bill Ayers I must admit. As for Chicago public schools, I NEVER attended CPS. We were afraid that they would do us bodily harm because we were so genteel and sheltered. As a grown person, I moved away from Chicago so that my kids would not attend those schools because I did not have the funds for private school. Instead they went to the public schools in a small southern IL town. Heloise

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 19:43:48 EDT

Sweet Sarah Begins to Inspire The Ugly Americans "...Palin's routine attacks on the media have begun to spill into ugliness. In Clearwater, arriving reporters were greeted with shouts and taunts by the crowd of about 3,000. Palin then went on to blame Katie Couric's questions for her "less-than-successful interview with kinda mainstream media." At that, Palin supporters turned on reporters in the press area, waving thunder sticks and shouting abuse. Others hurled obscenities at a camera crew. One Palin supporter shouted a racial epithet at an African American sound man for a network and told him, "Sit down, boy." Sorry, those of you who didn't see her for the ignorant bitch she is.

Comment by bliffle on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 18:54:58 EDT

Profound, really profound Cannon: "A JUST system recognizes all citizens as Citizens, not (pressuregroup)citizens." Victor Hugo expressed this best: "The law, in all it's majesty, proclaims that rich man and poor man alike are prohibited from sleeping under bridges".

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 18:34:04 EDT

Cannon, So you don't mean colorblind: ignoring that we may in fact favor some people or disfavor others based on ethnicity. In that case, I don't have a problem with that.

Comment by Cannonshop on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 18:25:33 EDT

"Colorblind"-as in weighing people by what they DO, not what they look like. it isn't likely to make you feel better about yourself, but applying ONE standard to everyone, regardless. If a guy beats his wife, it doesn't matter that he's white, brown, green, or purple-polka-dots, he's a beater and a scumbag by definition of what he does. Druggie, murderer, petty thief, they're all the same regardless of who their daddy was or wasn't. The same can be said of con-men, and while it's a bit of an idealistic view, Cindy, there are a great many con-men in Wall Street and D.C. who need to go to the same prisons we send the con-men from Trailerpark USA and Slumville. To Be Justice, Justice must be blind and inconsiderate of background. weighting the scales based on who someone's daddy was makes as much sense as NOT prosecuting a drunk driver because his parents were alcoholics. deciding that some groups get treatment different because they are 'special' just perpetuates injustices in the system. It's the equivalent of saying "Oh, it's okay, they're just Wogs, after all, they don't know any better." THAT is indefensible.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:22:37 EDT

Cannon, But I am an activist. Which activists are you referring to? "colorblind": you mean ignoring reality?

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:19:14 EDT

Oh, Clav, one more thing. I'm not a teacher yet. I've been taking classes for my retirement job in the next year. (Ft. Lauderdale here I come.)

Comment by Cannonshop on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:15:22 EDT

The other problem being that while I don't have a problem either with your program, Cindy, or with the book definition of "Social Justice", that's NOT what activists mean when they use the term. irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race, religion, etc., are to be treated equally and without prejudice. Irrespective, as in colorblind, Cindy. Most of the time when the words "Social Justice" are USED, it's to advocate for special treatment for a pressure group, RESPECTIVE of ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, race, religion, etc. A JUST system recognizes all citizens as Citizens, not (pressuregroup)citizens.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:13:17 EDT

Okay Clav, But I am still waiting for someone to tell me what Ayers taught through the CAC project. Really, I can't find anything myself, at the moment. I'd like the "what" of what was the teaching, not someone else calling it radical. If you find anything, please let me know. Perhaps the actual records might be available soon.

Comment by Clavos on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 16:02:43 EDT

Actually, Cindy, I think the program you describe is excellent; props to you for teaching it and for your innovative methodology. But radical it isn't. At least not in the sense of what Ayers taught through the CAC project.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 15:55:21 EDT

Oh and don't forget all the subversive discussions can be gleaned out of such a radical method of teaching. The experience with the elderly could lead to other discussions. For example: We could discuss critical thinking about TV commercials. Discussion of what advertising is might result in questioning what the goal of advertising is. Children might learn how to fact check about products and claims. Someone might get the idea that their body size/shape/age is okay, what if they had an idea like that as they grew up? What would that mean for Revlon's revenues? Radical!

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 15:14:37 EDT

Here's an example of part of a series of lesson plans on aging that I developed based on a social justice principal. I feel that something we do in our society is to lock the elderly away from view in nursing homes, which are often hell holes of despair. Aging is taboo--we understand this from all of the TV commercials that tell us so. The lesson plan includes trips to a local nursing home to read to the elderly. Dialogs are encouraged. Often, experiencing reality like this has a number of benefits: 1) The old people get some company. 2) The children get to hear the voices of their fellow society members directly. 3) Exposure to aging people may help to "normalize" the idea of aging and promote self-acceptance. 4) The children get to see a part of society whose voice has been shut off. That is they get to experience a part of reality they generally don't see. 5) Through reading children learn vocabulary and grammar. Incorporating reading as an activity is the best way to improve reading and writing skills. Seeing exactly how social policies effect people in our society is something I believe we should be doing. If what I believe is religious secularism then I am a proud heretic of the Church of Capitalism.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:50:25 EDT

Cannon, Justice is a religion? Hey look, businessdictionary.com has a fairly good definition of social justice: Fair and proper administration of laws conforming to the natural law that all persons, irrespective of ethnic origin, gender, possessions, race, religion, etc., are to be treated equally and without prejudice. See also civil rights. Holy shit! I guess that makes me some kind of "secular religious zealot". What is wrong with this world? How did we decide that even justice is not valuable? Are we not social creatures anymore? Are we merely money-grabbing machines? So that nothing but aiding the making of money is worthwhile? Note: For those of you who don't like the "ahistoric" phrase "natural law" just replace it with "reasonable proposition".

Comment by Cannonshop on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:15:45 EDT

"Critical thinking" and "Social Justice" are mutually exclusive terms, Cindy. The first relies on examining inputs based on their outcomes, honest data analysis, and skepticism. The second relies on belief in a secular religion.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 14:01:16 EDT

Sol Stern is a neocon who sees "radicals" under his bed. According to him the entire NYC school system is filled with radicals. RADICAL TEACH N.Y.C. SCHOOLS' NEW FAD So, the CAC was promoting "teaching for social justice". I guess they were ahead of their time. Interesting, that is part of my pedagogy (which focuses on critical thinking and social justice). Students should learn to become active participants in their society. They should also be trusted with a factual accounting of events rather than cultural "incantations" which rather view the world like "Leave it to Beaver" by ignoring reality. Here is a review of Stern's book: Breaking Free Frequently Stern's objections to the horrors of progressive educational methods are more troubling. For example, Stern decries attempts to celebrate "Black History, Hispanic Heritage, Asian/Pacific Heritage, Women's History, Lesbian and Gay History - which nearly takes up the entire school calendar, leaving scant time for plain old American history." Presumably "plain old American history" need not include blacks, Hispanics, Asians, women, or gays.

Comment by Franco on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 13:22:09 EDT

#89 — Cindy D Cindy, all we want is some answers from Obama. To date, he and his campain are trying to get as far away from it as they can. The more they try, the more people want to know why. Here is more, I would like Obama to explain the following too. In 1995, with Obama as chairman of Bill Ayers newly formed Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a school reform organization, CAC's first grant out of the box was to Michael Klonsky's Workshop for 175,000. The CAC provided another $482,662 to Klonsdy over the next few years. Mike Klonsky was a former SDS comrade of Ayers and later helped found a maoist party in the United States, travelling to meet with Chinese leaders in 1977 for their endorsement of his effort here. Klonsky's Small Schools Workshop received a total of $647.000 dollars from the CAC headed by Obama and Ayers. In a book, "Revolution in the Air," author Max Elbaum, himself a former Maoist activist, recounts that in Beijing, Klonsky toasted the Chinese Stalinist leadership who, in turn, hailed the formation of his Communist Party group as "reflecting the aspirations of the proletariat and working people," effectively recognizing Klonsky's organization as the all-but-official U.S. Maoist party. Michael Klonsky leader of the New Communist Movement. Why is that kind of money going into special communit education programs through Mr. Obama at Chicago Annenberg Challenge, why did he authorize CAC funds to the New Communist Party to fund their special school work shops. This is reasonable question. It's not a smear, all these facts came out of the CAC records stored at the UIE library.

Comment by Clavos on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:47:16 EDT

Annenberg gave the grant... A big mistake on the Foundation's part. They obviously didn't vet Ayers before turning him loose with Ambassador Annenberg's money. What is "radicalization" of children? What were they teaching them, to make bombs and blow things up? Here's just one citation, from an article titled "The Bomber as School Reformer," by Sol Stern and published in today's City Journal:

As I have shown in previous articles in City Journal, Ayers's school reform agenda focuses almost exclusively on the idea of teaching for "social justice" in the classroom. This has nothing to do with the social-justice ideals of the Sermon on the Mount or Martin Luther King's "I Have a Dream" speech. Rather, Ayers and his education school comrades are explicit about the need to indoctrinate public school children with the belief that America is a racist, militarist country and that the capitalist system is inherently unfair and oppressive. As a leader of this growing "reform" movement, Ayers was recently elected vice president for curriculum of the American Education Research Association, the nation's largest organization of ed school professors and researchers. (emphasis added)

Sounds pretty radical to me. Stern is not alone. Simply google Ayers' name and you'll find numerous references to his CAC activities that agree with Mr. Stern.

Comment by zingzing on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:28:28 EDT

oh, jesus. sarah palin worships with a witch doctor, mccain accepted endorsements from pastors that want to wage war on islam and the catholic church, obama hangs out with ex-radicals... i once sat next to a hooker and have had people huffing paint and whip-its in my bedroom... you, dave have been known to converse with socialists and once lived in a communist state... funny how this shit comes up (again) when mccain has his back against the wall. and he doesn't even say it. he gets his little minion to do it for him. pathetic. pick a real issue.

Comment by Cindy D on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:26:42 EDT

RE #90 Clav, Any chance I can get a reference. "...lost control of the CAC when it funded Ayers..." I'm not sure what that means. Ayers wrote the grant for the CAC. Annenberg gave the grant (about 50 million. The city matched it 2:1 (about 100 million). I can see it now...the city of Chicago giving 100 million to a group that acknowledges the goal of "radicalizing" children. You know, the city of Chicago--the city that obviously "supports terrorism." What is "radicalization" of children? What were they teaching them, to make bombs and blow things up? Why doesn't anyone tell me what the hell was radical, extremist, etc?

Comment by DaveNalle on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:10:10 EDT

When Bill Ayers was in the Weathermen, Obama was 8 years old. He was then on a board with him. He was actually on two boards with him and Ayers hosted one of his first political fundraisers at his house. That's just a bit closer relationship than you suggest. Dave

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 12:06:34 EDT

Well hopefully my little reductio ad absurdum will remain a storm in a virtual teacup, Clav. But the worldwide nature of the internet means whatever you write will get taken seriously by somebody. More likely if it's an article and not a mere comment - as I found out when I penned a tongue-in-cheek Ron Paul [crosses self, resists temptation to link to said screed] article a few months back.

Comment by Clavos on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:35:57 EDT

That's how rumors get blown out of proportion on the Internet, Doc. I give it three days until it's on FNC.

Comment by Dr Dreadful on Sarah's Standup Debate

Tue, 7 Oct 2008 11:31:48 EDT

When Bill Ayers was in the Weathermen, Obama was 8 years old. That doesn't matter, Lisa. Anyone with even a slightly shady past who's ever been in the same room as Obama is now an 'associate'. I hear that Obama's mother's midwife once assisted in a backstreet abortion back when they were illegal, which of course makes Obama a baby murderer.