The Old School house Magazine... is tea party?

[Slartibartfast]

 

However, I think it is disingenuous to say there tea party has Democrats as part of the movement. If they are there, they are an extreme minority. Republicans, Libertarians, and independents, yes.

 

Actually the people that I know who were Libertarians before the Tea Party movement liked it at first but now are opposed. Libertarians believe in personal freedoms. The Tea Party does not.

[LibraryLover]

I've always thought that mag :tongue_smilie::blink: . They've always represented the most negative aspect of hsing for me.

Edited August 8, 2011 by LibraryLover

[Mrs Mungo]

I was actually involved with the tea party movement as part of its grassroots inception. I attended the first tea party demonstration in our region on tax day. And it absolutely was, a grassroots movement. I was there, at the roots, volunteering my time was a graphic designer. No one was paying me. No one was paying for the printing (it was donated by a local printing company). I was communicating with our "leader" who was a college-aged young woman, unpaid. Whatever services and resources needed were donated or provided by volunteers like myself

 

Fox News suggested the *initial protests* in their programming. Fox News provided organizing information on their website and on air. They were labeled as "FNC Tax Day Tea Parties" on Glenn Beck's show. It's impossible to separate or underestimate the value of such advertising from the movement. It's always been married to the Republican party. You and others were misled about the nature of such groups.

[zenjenn]

Actually the people that I know who were Libertarians before the Tea Party movement liked it at first but now are opposed. Libertarians believe in personal freedoms. The Tea Party does not.

 

The "tea party" is not organized enough to have platform on social issues, but yes, being more libertarian myself is why my involvement with the tea party is in the past-tense. There is a decided republican bent to the movement nationally.

 

Plenty of libertarians remain involved, however, and it is not a cohesive organization where anyone can say what "it" believes outside the the scope of the issues on which it was founded, which are economic in nature.

[Slartibartfast]

The "tea party" is not organized enough to have platform on social issues, but yes, being more libertarian myself is why my involvement with the tea party is in the past-tense. There is a decided republican bent to the movement nationally.

 

Plenty of libertarians remain involved, however, and it is not a cohesive organization where anyone can say what "it" believes outside the the scope of the issues on which it was founded, which are economic in nature.

 

Really? Because the politicians it seems to be endorsing or who speak for the party are decidedly opposed to many Libertarian values.

[Audrey]

Do you all think this sort of thing will happen more frequently until there is an actual schism in the community?

 

 

Should we really be bothered to care if it does or doesn't? I am not homeschooling to be a part of a faction, or a club, or a movement, or a lifestyle. I am homeschooling to educate my child. Whatever politics someone may want to wield while wearing the badge of homeschooling truly makes no difference to me.

 

Let the nutters be nutters. I already have to say "no, we're not those kind of homeschoolers." I can't see how a schism would change anything -- except that I might have to say that more often.

[Mrs Mungo]

Should we really be bothered to care if it does or doesn't? I am not homeschooling to be a part of a faction, or a club, or a movement, or a lifestyle. I am homeschooling to educate my child. Whatever politics someone may want to wield while wearing the badge of homeschooling truly makes no difference to me.

 

Let the nutters be nutters. I already have to say "no, we're not those kind of homeschoolers." I can't see how a schism would change anything -- except that I might have to say that more often.

 

It doesn't matter much to me. I think it probably matters more to people *just* to the right of me.

[zenjenn]

Really? Because the politicians it seems to be endorsing or who speak for the party are decidedly opposed to many Libertarian values.

 

Would it shock you to find out that politicians in office will latch on to any convenient, well-publicized thing they can in order to advance their own completely unrelated agenda?

 

In essence, I agree with you, which is why I did not associate with the movement for long. Others, however, of a more libertarian bent, do not see another movement more effectively representing their values.

 

It is important to note that the "tea party" does not actually exist. It exists as a concept, as, say, the green movement exists. What that means varies vastly to the individuals involved and grossly divergent views on unrelated topics will exist within that movement. And yes, people will use it, just as the food company will say "BUY MY PRODUCT IN THE UNNECESSARY PACKAGING because my unnecessary packaging is ECO!"

 

The need for some kind of cohesion to fiscal responsibility arose out of utter financial irresponsibility on the part of BOTH parties in our two-party system. The Republicans have in fact clung to the sentiment of the tea party movement like a life-raft, and while they have re-shaped what that movement stands for in the public eye, the movement has also reshaped how the Republicans - and even how the Democrats - are operating (even if only marginally so.)

Edited August 8, 2011 by zenjenn

[Slartibartfast]

Would it shock you to find out that politicians in office will latch on to any convenient, well-publicized thing they can in order to advance their own completely unrelated agenda?

 

In essence, I agree with you, which is why I did not associate with the movement for long. Others, however, of a more libertarian bent, do not see another movement more effectively representing their values.

 

It is important to note that the "tea party" does not actually exist. It exists as a concept, as, say, the green movement exists. What that means varies vastly to the individuals involved and grossly divergent views on unrelated topics will exist within that movement. And yes, people will use it, just as the food company will say "BUY MY PRODUCT IN THE UNNECESSARY PACKAGING because my unnecessary packaging is ECO!"

 

The need for some kind of cohesion to fiscal responsibility arose out of utter financial irresponsibility on the part of BOTH parties in our two-party system. The Republicans have in fact clung to the sentiment of the tea party movement like a life-raft, and while they have re-shaped what that movement stands for in the public eye, the movement has also reshaped how the Republicans - and even how the Democrats - are operating (even if only marginally so.)

 

Herm. I am afraid we agree,

 

*looks around for someone to start a fight with*

[Kirch]

Should we really be bothered to care if it does or doesn't? I am not homeschooling to be a part of a faction, or a club, or a movement, or a lifestyle. I am homeschooling to educate my child. Whatever politics someone may want to wield while wearing the badge of homeschooling truly makes no difference to me.

 

Let the nutters be nutters. I already have to say "no, we're not those kind of homeschoolers." I can't see how a schism would change anything -- except that I might have to say that more often.

 

:iagree: I think what's happening is that as the homeschooling numbers grow, the divisions and differences that are already there are just being highlighted as the different "flavors" bump into each other unexpectedly with magazine articles, hs conference seminars, books, etc. The schism is already there (or, schisms, probably). The real issue is, what kind of drama will the "bumps" cause?

[Spy Car]

Before the first tax day protests the Koch brothers were funneling money into this so-called "grass-root movement" through a group called Americans for Prosperity.

 

Their father was the leading funder of the John Birch Society and the sons are continuing the same political agenda. The Koch brothers have tried to keep their funding of the Tea Party covert, because it doesn't help the perception of the movement when it is secretly funded by oil billionaires.

 

Bill

[WishboneDawn]

nm

Edited August 8, 2011 by WishboneDawn

[Rivka]

:iagree: I think what's happening is that as the homeschooling numbers grow, the divisions and differences that are already there are just being highlighted as the different "flavors" bump into each other unexpectedly with magazine articles, hs conference seminars, books, etc. The schism is already there (or, schisms, probably). The real issue is, what kind of drama will the "bumps" cause?

 

I agree. I also think that as homeschooling numbers grow, there's more jockeying - although I think it's one-sided, actually - to claim the numbers as support or authority for one's positions.

 

Mitchell Stevens, who is a sociologist, wrote a great book about different cultures among homeschoolers. It's called Kingdom of Children and I think it's well worth the read.

[Susan Wise Bauer]

Don't get sidetracked into discussion of the Tea Party, please.

 

(You know better.)

 

SWB

[LaxMom]

Ah, yes, the 1950s, when "American was prosperous, strong and unified, and its culture was unapologetically Judeo-Christian"... except those pesky Judeos weren't exactly being unified into the country club, then, were they? :001_huh:

 

And, yeah, what IS "animal liberation"?

 

This whole thing makes me gag. When I first saw the "current" civil war reference, I thought it was laughable... and tragic that people are actually putting forth that amount of hyperbole with a straight face. Thanks, Susan, for seeing the same thing. Frankly, it makes me nervous that these venemous nutters seem to have a growing audience. Their message is violent. Can we go back to the days of civil discourse, please? "Civil" being the operative there.

Edited August 8, 2011 by MyCrazyHouse

[Negin]

I no longer subscribe to any. Most are really conservative and not at all my cup of tea.

Plus, some (I know of one for sure who does this) only rave about products that give them advertising $$$. Not exactly fair and unbiased, is it?

I also stopped reading Reader's Digest a few years ago, since they said that they plan to be the equivalent of Fox News. :ack2:

I get all my homeschooling info from you fabulous folks here. :D :grouphug: :)

[Word Nerd]

Don't get sidetracked into discussion of the Tea Party, please.

 

(You know better.)

 

SWB

 

Bump.

[cdrumm4448]

I suspect, like anything with a rather loose base (single unifying factor), TP groups vary quite a bit depending solely on their members' personalities.

 

Politically, I get all bunched up every time I see "Libertarian". Not because I have anything against Libertarians but because some of the people I know who identify that way tend to be obnoxious, tinfoil hat wearing, hate spewing, survivalist types. I have to remind myself that there are perfectly normal people who legitimately embrace the concepts of personal freedom but aren't the type to walk into the park screaming "I'm a Libertarian!! Don't tell me to stop screaming in your face, you're treading on my PERSONAL FREEDOM!"

 

Non-politically, it's akin to the UU church. Yes, there is a common theme, but the one near me is Methodist. The next closest is more secular/philosophical, some are decidedly pagan... If there was a media conglomerate who had a special interest in one particular congregational trait, I'm sure the world would also see UUs as mostly that.

 

Unfortunately, it's the loud ones who end up defining and owning the message.

 

(I'm a way liberal Dem, though. I have no dog in this race)

 

What is a tinfoil hat?

[LaxMom]

What is a tinfoil hat?

That is what you wear when the government (aliens/other groups) is trying to read your throughts. Generally right before you discover the implant is how they're REALLY controlling your mind.

 

(which is to say, there are nutters that unfortunately seem to identify - loudly - with any group, much to the embarrassment of the non-nutters)

Edited August 8, 2011 by MyCrazyHouse

[ktgrok]

I have. I have also asked that they not send me anything further, even any other magazines that are left on my subscription.

 

Here is the letter from the publisher talking about the article.

 

and

 

Here is the article.

 

Wow. That man is one angry, hate filled, mis informed dude. I feel dirty reading that.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

I used to get both TOS and Home Education. Home Education used to annoy me with its prevailing strain of "sky is falling" pronouncements about the future of homeschooling.

 

I think that the future of homeschooling magazines is actually rather bleak. Magazines in general are failing left and right. My guess is that advertisers want the most bang for their buck and that it is hard for a company to position itself well within the readership of a wide, homeschooling focused magazine. Even sites like Ed Helper disappointed me because because they seemed to be overlooking such wide swathes of possible curricula (not sure if this was because those curricula hadn't "partnered" with the site to be purchased through them, so were not mentioned or if there was a particular viewpoint bent coming through, or if the site developers just weren't familiar with some of the more esoteric options).

 

And as lots of posters on this board have demonstrated, faith is a huge part of the lives of many homeschoolers. Of course when they write articles, that position comes through. Similarly, homeschoolers who have found rewards in simple living, unschooling, Montessori at home or vegetarian diets are going to feel inspired to share that wisdom with others. (And no, I'm not positioning faith and simple living or unschooling as opposites.)

 

What I see taking the place of the homeschool magazines of the past are more homeschool webzines or "channels" where you can find detailed reviews and comments about homeschooling. There is a lot of that right here (amid the vacuum recs and would you eat that threads).

I'd love to see a site that even had a pro-con style parallel column thing going. What would have me over the moon would be something that gathered up columns topically so I could read lots of articles about history curricula or algebra or field trip ideas, etc. It could have a "channel" for homeschool living (while sick or moving, with toddlers, planning, meals, dealing with frustrations, high school planning, college apps).

 

Blog carnivals fill some of this need, but I'm still sort of dreaming for something more.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

Never mind.

 

Edited: I see my objections to dragging this thread into a political argument have already been covered.

Edited August 8, 2011 by Sebastian (a lady)

[TravelingChris]

This article was an advertisement for World Net Daily and their magazine. A long time ago, I used to go to WND daily. I stopped going many years ago. Why? Because they carry inaccurate stories and hyperbole that I don't think is helpful. But I think that the problem with this story is the problem with all too many hs articles in a number of magazines. The publishers get the authors of books or the makers of some product to write an article about the general subject. So instead of using a homeschool parent or some math professor to write about what is important in math education, the publishers use the maker of a given math program who then tailors his remarks in a way that matches his program. It isn't cynical. Presumably makers of most curriculum or books write them or make them in a way they think best represents the concepts they are trying to teach.

This article was supposed to be about current events. Instead of getting a homeschool parent or a group of parents to talk about how they incorporate various media in teaching current events, the publishers got a contributing editor of one such outlet and then he did a poor job. Instead of discussing how to incorporate sources into a home school program, he has a long political diatribe with only the magazine and website he is involved with mentioned.

[Renee in NC]

Do you all think this sort of thing will happen more frequently until there is an actual schism in the community?

 

I hope not because I think a great number of people fall somewhere in the middle and then we will have to choose one extreme or the other.:glare:

[Negin]

This article was an advertisement for World Net Daily and their magazine. A long time ago, I used to go to WND daily. I stopped going many years ago. Why?

I also used to visit them and stopped. My reason: they began writing against foreign students (what I used to be) getting student visas to study in the U.S. It infuriated me. I got my BA in Oregon and MPH in NY. And then they were against people like me who wish to study in the U.S.? They seem to be in favor of the U.S. becoming more and more insular. :confused:

[Wheres Toto]

I had not seen this before. Thanks for the links.

 

You guys know that I am silent about politics. Helping parents teach their kids is my passion. The home school world is so politicized already that, were I to be open about my politics, I'd run the risk of driving off parents who would otherwise find my work helpful. That's my decision; it might not be yours, were you in my shoes.

 

However. I am also passionate about history. And about understanding the past properly.

 

This guy is obviously affected by a family trauma, and I'm sorry about this. But I'm kind of appalled by the publication of this article in an educational magazine, because it is so filled with jaw-droppingly inaccurate statements.

 

A "civil war"? Really? Anyone know anything about the real Civil War, and what it did to our country? Whatever you think of our culture's current state, making a verbal parallel between our century and the horrific destruction of the Civil War is indefensible. And you notice he doesn't defend it. He just states it and then assumes he's proved it (a logical fallacy, BTW--see the "History" chapter of TWEM if you're curious).

 

The fifties an "innocent time" without "much divorce" in which "everyone loved Christmas" and "America was prosperious, strong, and unified"? Are you KIDDING ME? Sure, unless you were black (like my adopted sister). Or Japanese-American. Or one of the poor white women whose doctor decided to sterilize her without her knowledge as a eugenic precaution (actual story from MY COUNTY, circa 1955). Yeah. Innocent.

 

Anyone who can, with a straight face, list all the liberation movements, Supreme Court decisions, and "upsurges" that he does, while pretending that he's established some sort of cause and effect relationship, has NO idea how to think about historical causality, let alone how to demonstrate it.

 

And wait (this is NOT a political statement, by the way, it's an observation on his method)-- the "cult of personality" surrounding Obama is tragically destructive, but the JKF era was a shining time of hope and promise? Anybody see the disconnect?

 

Oh, and by the way: Communism, Marxism, and socialism are not identical. That was History 101.

 

If TOS chooses to run political columns, whatever. They'll drive away people who dislike that political party, and attract those who do.

 

But to publish this disconnected and illogical piece in an education magazine--that I find discouraging, disheartening, and alienating.

 

Here endeth the lesson. And if you happen to have a copy of TWEM on your bookshelf, go look up the section on "logic-stage reading" and what questions to ask of your history books. And compare it to this column.

 

SWB

 

:thumbup1:

 

That article was kind of scary not the least because at least some people are probably going to buy into the whole thing. Bleck.

 

I assumed animal liberation was referring to the conservation efforts - saving endangered animals, etc.

 

The readers of the magazine are probably mostly women - I wonder how many are going to object to him counting women's liberation among the evil?

[Mrs Mungo]

I hope not because I think a great number of people fall somewhere in the middle and then we will have to choose one extreme or the other.:glare:

 

I tend to think it will split with the far right on one side and everyone else on the other. The people on the left and the people in the middle are, in my experience, less likely to be exclusionary or to mix their politics with homeschooling.

[4wildberrys]

This is my NUMBER ONE GRIPE about so much in the homeschooling community now! Why, why, why must everyone think we all need to be told how to dress, what to read, how to worship...or not, how to vote, how to think, how to eat, and on and on ad nauseum???

 

If I pay for homeschooling resources, I want to know about academics and learning styles and MAYBE organizing all my crap (.).

:iagree::iagree:

[4wildberrys]

I had not seen this before. Thanks for the links.

 

You guys know that I am silent about politics. Helping parents teach their kids is my passion. The home school world is so politicized already that, were I to be open about my politics, I'd run the risk of driving off parents who would otherwise find my work helpful. That's my decision; it might not be yours, were you in my shoes.

 

However. I am also passionate about history. And about understanding the past properly.

 

This guy is obviously affected by a family trauma, and I'm sorry about this. But I'm kind of appalled by the publication of this article in an educational magazine, because it is so filled with jaw-droppingly inaccurate statements.

 

A "civil war"? Really? Anyone know anything about the real Civil War, and what it did to our country? Whatever you think of our culture's current state, making a verbal parallel between our century and the horrific destruction of the Civil War is indefensible. And you notice he doesn't defend it. He just states it and then assumes he's proved it (a logical fallacy, BTW--see the "History" chapter of TWEM if you're curious).

 

The fifties an "innocent time" without "much divorce" in which "everyone loved Christmas" and "America was prosperious, strong, and unified"? Are you KIDDING ME? Sure, unless you were black (like my adopted sister). Or Japanese-American. Or one of the poor white women whose doctor decided to sterilize her without her knowledge as a eugenic precaution (actual story from MY COUNTY, circa 1955). Yeah. Innocent.

 

Anyone who can, with a straight face, list all the liberation movements, Supreme Court decisions, and "upsurges" that he does, while pretending that he's established some sort of cause and effect relationship, has NO idea how to think about historical causality, let alone how to demonstrate it.

 

And wait (this is NOT a political statement, by the way, it's an observation on his method)-- the "cult of personality" surrounding Obama is tragically destructive, but the JKF era was a shining time of hope and promise? Anybody see the disconnect?

 

Oh, and by the way: Communism, Marxism, and socialism are not identical. That was History 101.

 

If TOS chooses to run political columns, whatever. They'll drive away people who dislike that political party, and attract those who do.

 

But to publish this disconnected and illogical piece in an education magazine--that I find discouraging, disheartening, and alienating.

 

Here endeth the lesson. And if you happen to have a copy of TWEM on your bookshelf, go look up the section on "logic-stage reading" and what questions to ask of your history books. And compare it to this column.

 

SWB

 

 

Thank you so much for this grounding lesson ;)

[dtsmamtj]

This article was an advertisement for World Net Daily and their magazine. A long time ago, I used to go to WND daily. I stopped going many years ago. Why? Because they carry inaccurate stories and hyperbole that I don't think is helpful. But I think that the problem with this story is the problem with all too many hs articles in a number of magazines. The publishers get the authors of books or the makers of some product to write an article about the general subject. So instead of using a homeschool parent or some math professor to write about what is important in math education, the publishers use the maker of a given math program who then tailors his remarks in a way that matches his program. It isn't cynical. Presumably makers of most curriculum or books write them or make them in a way they think best represents the concepts they are trying to teach.

This article was supposed to be about current events. Instead of getting a homeschool parent or a group of parents to talk about how they incorporate various media in teaching current events, the publishers got a contributing editor of one such outlet and then he did a poor job. Instead of discussing how to incorporate sources into a home school program, he has a long political diatribe with only the magazine and website he is involved with mentioned.

:iagree:

 

T

[Soror]

I have never subscribed to this magazine and would self identify as a tea party person myself. However, that article was horrible and wouldn't line-up with my beliefs and seemed to nothing more than self- advertisement and fear mongering- done with bad journalism and fact checking. I did see that they had some interesting articles though. I read articles from other left wing sources that I certainly don't agree with but I haven't found anyone I agree with entirely except the RCC :)

[Mrs Mungo]

Nvm

[LaxMom]

Oops. I see some of my comments were deleted. My apologies. I only wished to express that the loudest nuts in any groups are the ones who tend to define the message for the rest, not make any political commentary.

[KnitWit]

Should we really be bothered to care if it does or doesn't? I am not homeschooling to be a part of a faction, or a club, or a movement, or a lifestyle. I am homeschooling to educate my child. Whatever politics someone may want to wield while wearing the badge of homeschooling truly makes no difference to me.

 

 

:iagree:

[rwjx2khsmj]

I received my first copy of TOS on Saturday, sat down to read it last night. I should have gotten a copy to look through before I subscribed. :glare:

[justamouse]

This is my NUMBER ONE GRIPE about so much in the homeschooling community now! Why, why, why must everyone think we all need to be told how to dress, what to read, how to worship...or not, how to vote, how to think, how to eat, and on and on ad nauseum???

 

If I pay for homeschooling resources, I want to know about academics and learning styles and MAYBE organizing all my crap (.).

 

Amen.

[Mynyel]

Susan, it is often amazing to me that logic and published authors often seem to be strangers to one another.

 

:iagree:

 

Funny you should say that. Dh and I were talking about that very thing the other day...

[Parrothead]

:iagree: I think what's happening is that as the homeschooling numbers grow, the divisions and differences that are already there are just being highlighted as the different "flavors" bump into each other unexpectedly with magazine articles, hs conference seminars, books, etc. The schism is already there (or, schisms, probably). The real issue is, what kind of drama will the "bumps" cause?

:iagree: I've been able to see the separations (us vs. them) on several fronts for a couple years now.

 

 

I hope not because I think a great number of people fall somewhere in the middle and then we will have to choose one extreme or the other.:glare:

I don't think so. It things continue as they are currently moving it will be an extreme far right vs. every one else.

I tend to think it will split with the far right on one side and everyone else on the other. The people on the left and the people in the middle are, in my experience, less likely to be exclusionary or to mix their politics with homeschooling.

:iagree:You beat me to it. :D

[Parrothead]

This is my NUMBER ONE GRIPE about so much in the homeschooling community now! Why, why, why must everyone think we all need to be told how to dress, what to read, how to worship...or not, how to vote, how to think, how to eat, and on and on ad nauseum???

 

If I pay for homeschooling resources, I want to know about academics and learning styles and MAYBE organizing all my crap (.).

I think it is because the people the continue to perpetuate this way of living have lost the ability to think for themselves so they have no choice but to listen to someone "in authority" instead of being their own authority.

[DaffodilDreams]

:

 

 

I agree with the first bit, haven't tried the magazine, but maybe I should.

 

It was a wonderful mag - informative and witty, great combo - but it's out of business. I was bummed when she made the announcement. She occasionally still posts on FB, and I think you can order back issues of the mag. I really miss that publication.

 

ETA: I just realized the quote and my reply didn't really make it clear what publication I'm talking about. So no one has to back track, I'm referring to Secular Homeschool Magazine.

[Mrs Mungo]

It was a wonderful mag - informative and witty, great combo - but it's out of business. I was bummed when she made the announcement. She occasionally still posts on FB, and I think you can order back issues of the mag. I really miss that publication.

 

ETA: I just realized the quote and my reply didn't really make it clear what publication I'm talking about. So no one has to back track, I'm referring to Secular Homeschool Magazine.

 

LOL, for a second there I was taken aback!

[DaffodilDreams]

LOL, for a second there I was taken aback!

 

Yes, thank goodness I went back and clarified! : )

[WishboneDawn]

I think it is because the people the continue to perpetuate this way of living have lost the ability to think for themselves so they have no choice but to listen to someone "in authority" instead of being their own authority.

 

:iagree::iagree::iagree:

[BigMamaBird]

I'm a strong Christian and a Tea Party sympathiser and Old Schoolhouse was still too much for me. :glare: I agree with previous posters who've said that I want my homeschooling magazines to be about homeschooling.

[Negin]

:iagree: I've been able to see the separations (us vs. them) on several fronts for a couple years now.

Me too.

Back in '02 or so, when I first started homeschooling, I got some back issues or maybe it was current issues of, I think, Home Education magazine. It had an interview with a bi-racial Christian homeschooling family. I was disgusted to read that they had received a great deal of opposition from the more conservative homeschoolers because of their mixed marriage, etc. It was then that I realized that there are different types of homeschoolers (at least in the U.S. - here in Grenada, there's pretty much only one homeschooling family and you're reading her post right now ;)). Before reading this article, I was quite naive and new to homeschooling.

[curlylocks]

I have. I have also asked that they not send me anything further, even any other magazines that are left on my subscription.

 

 

 

I just emailed and asked that they cancel my subscription. I also requested that they refund my remaining balance. (I just renenewed for 2 years...:glare:)

[ma23peas]

I say vote with your dollar! If it offends you do not support it financially..I just cancelled our cable today..we'll rely on Netflix streaming for programs..which really we do not have time for anymore. I would love for there to be a 'just the facts' programming...NPR is biased, CNN is biased, Foxnews is biased, so I just will not support any of them....I'll find the facts myself and make a decision. Easy in today's surfing abilities with the net!

[stripe]

Oh. Goodness. Barack Hussein Obama, face of Marxism + Shariah Islam? What? It's hard to know what to say to this stuff. I think I took an issue out of the library once and thought it looked conservative Christian. I guess the Old schoolhouse reference is supposed to invoke nostalgia for "the good old days."

 

I too would love a hs mag about hsing.

 

How do you find the facts on the internet? I mean, I don't personally have the ability to go to various countries to investigate world events on my own.

 

Eta: i am glad to have this forum.

Edited August 8, 2011 by stripe

[Annie Laurie]

It's the new Current Events column by David Kupelian on page 34. (If you don't subscribe, you can see the current issue online here.)

 

Is he for real?! Painting the 1950s as an idyllic time? Maybe if you were a white male. I've never read TOS before today, and as a homeschooler, I find that magazine embarrassing.

[Britomart]

I would love for there to be a 'just the facts' programming...NPR is biased, CNN is biased, Foxnews is biased, so I just will not support any of them....I'll find the facts myself and make a decision. Easy in today's surfing abilities with the net!

 

Well, the problem with "just the facts" is: which facts? Every time you report one event, you're choosing not to report every other event in the world.

 

One of the ways I deal with bias, personally, is that I listen to multiple sources with various bias. So I listen to NPR and I listen to our local conservative radio station. I regularly read both a feminist blog and an anti-feminist blog to see opposing reporting on social issues. Etc. If I can hear the same story reported from two sources with opposing biases, I feel like I get a more rounded view of the situation. You can kind of make a Venn diagram with each story, marking where both sources agree (probably true) and where they don't (possibly bias).