Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Monday September 07 2015, @06:17AM   Printer-friendly
from the public-money-for-private-profit dept.

Common Dreams reports

The Seattle Times reports that

The ruling--believed to be one of the first of its kind in the country--overturns the law [I-1240] voters narrowly approved in 2012 allowing publicly funded, but privately operated, schools.

Teacher and author Mercedes Schneider offers more on the Act:

As is true of charter schools nationwide, the charters in Washington State (up to the current ruling) were eligible for public funding diverted from traditional public schools. Charter schools were approved via a November 2012 ballot initiative (I-1240, the Charter Schools Act) in which charters were declared to be "common schools" despite their not being subject to local control and local accountability. And also like America's charters in general, Washington's charters are not under the authority of elected school boards.

Thus, Washington voters had approved to give public money to private entities--a one-way street that provided no means for such funds to overseen by the public.

[...] The new ruling (pdf)[1] states that charters, "devoid of local control from their inception to their daily operation", cannot be classified as "common schools," nor have "access to restricted common school funding."

[...] "The Supreme Court has affirmed what we've said all along--charter schools steal money from our existing classrooms, and voters have no say in how these charter schools spend taxpayer funding," said Kim Mead, president of the [Washington Education Association], in a statement.

"Instead of diverting taxpayer dollars to unaccountable charter schools, it's time for the Legislature to fully fund K-12 public schools so that all of Washington's children get the quality education the Constitution guarantees them," Mead continued.

The Associated Press reports that the state had one charter school last year, and eight more have opened in the past few weeks.

I pity Ms. Schneider's students if she routinely starts sentences with conjunctions--especially consecutive, redundant conjunctions.

[1] I had trouble with the connection.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by Zz9zZ on Monday September 07 2015, @07:38AM

    by Zz9zZ (1348) on Monday September 07 2015, @07:38AM (#233169)

    Freedom to choose is pretty ingrained in the US mindset, and it would seem that charter schools fill a gap for the majority. There is no stealing occurring, it is the "consumer" making a different purchasing decision. We have tried to apply standardized curriculum, along with testing to measure, and the state of education has declined. We need to apply legislation to address problems, however we must allow people to work out their own solutions. Dictating how teachers teach immediately cripples their ability, and makes it incredibly difficult to use alternative methods.

    I think this is more about some "educational materials" lobbyists, or just another set of control-freaks that think their way is THE way. With education more than any field, there is no ONE way. Applying one guarantees leaving at least one child behind :P

    --
    ~Tilting at windmills~
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +3  
       Insightful=2, Interesting=1, Total=3
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   5  
  • (Score: 5, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2015, @08:08AM

    by aristarchus (2645) on Monday September 07 2015, @08:08AM (#233181) Journal

    Consumers? What the F*** are you saying? Did you graduate from a charter school? Or were you "home schooled"? There are no "consumers" of education, get that filthy idea right out of your mind right now! The rest of what you say is reasonable, except you do not see the ploy that Republicans are pulling. Vouchers! Yes, we let the market decide! Well, you know, if the market decided, I guess Donald Trump would be the best candidate for president! Classy! (But not too bright.) Charter schools are a scam to undermine public education, equal opportunity and effective democracy in the United States of America. That is all they are.

    So back to the "consumers": who "consumes" education? Most people think it is the students, since they are allegedly force feed information they have to regurgitate on exams. But this is wrong. Is it the parents, who get to choose where (not nearly so much "how" as they think) their offspring are educated? No, again. Children do not belong to their parents, except under the paterfamilias of the Roman Era, which fortunately is long past. So who is the consumer of education? Business, who want servile servants molded to serve? Scum. No, the consumer of education is the public, its purpose to to replicate citizens who will be equal to ourselves in terms of independent thought and clarity of judgment. We all consume education, and so it is very wrong to put it into the hands of either students or parents, and especially not in the hand of businessmen. Machiavelli was right on this, the nation that puts its future in the hands of mercenaries is lost.

    • (Score: 4, Insightful) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 07 2015, @12:17PM

      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday September 07 2015, @12:17PM (#233250) Homepage Journal

      "The Public" is a handy fiction you lot have made up to justify tyranny over individuals; it does not exist except as a rhetorical construct used to exploit those who find themselves in one minority or another. The only rights are individual rights. The only good is the good of the individual. All else is theft, oppression, and exploitation of men and women who would otherwise be free.

      --
      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
      • (Score: 0, Troll) by CyprusBlue on Monday September 07 2015, @05:16PM

        by CyprusBlue (943) on Monday September 07 2015, @05:16PM (#233350)

        Found the crazy

      • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Monday September 07 2015, @05:16PM

        by Zz9zZ (1348) on Monday September 07 2015, @05:16PM (#233351)

        "But its all for the greater good!"

        "The greater gooooood"

        "SHUT IT!"

        --
        ~Tilting at windmills~
      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2015, @08:22PM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Monday September 07 2015, @08:22PM (#233415) Journal

        Mighty Buzz: I have tried to explain this to you before. The INDIVIDUAL is a fiction. No man is an island. Robinson Crusoe was fiction. You would not be you without the "us" that educated you. Time to grow out of the Libertarian fantasies.

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 07 2015, @10:52PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday September 07 2015, @10:52PM (#233494) Homepage Journal

          Every bit of what I have has been paid for, so I owe nothing to "society", thank you very much. You don't get to take credit for anything the sweat of my brow has purchased either directly or with a temporary pit-stop in the form of cash. Ever.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 4, Insightful) by aristarchus on Monday September 07 2015, @11:01PM

            by aristarchus (2645) on Monday September 07 2015, @11:01PM (#233502) Journal

            Not what you "have", Buzz, what you "are"! That is what education gives you. But I guess I can see how we should try to ignore this in your case. Just saying.

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 07 2015, @11:31PM

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday September 07 2015, @11:31PM (#233519) Homepage Journal

              No, slappy, my education was paid for as well and, as I'm able to think for myself despite all the attempted programming, is not who I am. I can see how that would confuse you as you seem to have bought entirely in to the entirely liberal education cabal's party line and have never had a thought you could truly call your own.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 08 2015, @12:09AM

                by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @12:09AM (#233529) Journal

                No, whippy, no one can have thoughts of their own, because thoughts are not property! Because if they are, and all the liberal cabals of teachers unions are sapping the virile man-strength out of all young persons, they are violating intellectual property rights! I strongly suspect that you did not actually pay the full cost, or for that matter, the full value of your education, if that is, any of it had stuck. And why would you pay to be brainwashed, and why would you be so proud of the fact that you did not get what you paid for? I am quite sure you could have just "thought for yourself" without any schooling at all. After all, my fellow philosopher Rene Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am". So I guess that would mean, if you are, and you paid for it, you can think whatever you want. Of course, as a programmer who avoided programming, you know what thoughts without discernment are, don't you? A program with no data? Not even to the point of garbage in!

                I enjoy these little talks we have, Buzzard. I see that you do have an independent mind, and a desire to find the truth. So remember, you are not yet what you are, education is a never-ending process, and the first step to finding the truth is to admit that you might not have it.

                • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:39AM

                  by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:39AM (#233561) Homepage Journal

                  I strongly suspect that you did not actually pay the full cost, or for that matter, the full value of your education, if that is, any of it had stuck. And why would you pay to be brainwashed, and why would you be so proud of the fact that you did not get what you paid for?

                  What was paid was every penny asked of myself and my parents. If the state sold my education too low, that's their problem.

                  Why I'm proud? Simple, I don't owe anyone anything. That is the only way any free man should allow himself to live. I can turn a deaf ear to claims of you owe "society" this and "the community" that because I owe them nothing. Everything. Every last thing "society" has given me has been paid for by the state's own pricing. It means that every bit of wealth I create is by right mine and mine alone to dispose of however I choose.

                  Take this site, for instance. I'm not being paid cash money but I am getting fair exchange for my time. What I get in return for my work is a site that I enjoy using and that continues to improve. The moment that stops, so does my effort. I'm not a socialist but I do recognize value outside monetary.

                  If we could set up schools that actually demanded excellence and let those not capable of achieving it fail, I would be happy to contribute more to the communal pot. A workforce educated to the best of their ability instead of to the lowest common denominator is in everyone's, including my own, best interest. What we have now, however, is a joke. We've gone in the past hundred years from teaching Greek and Latin in highschool to teaching remedial English in college.

                  Why? Greed of the masses. Idiot parents think their idiot children are as good as anyone else and throw a fit if they can't pass their primary education. Idiot adults, having passed through a pathetic primary education through no merit of their own, go to college instead of learning a trade as they should. When they graduate, they've likely burned hundreds of thousands of dollars and achieved nothing but a liberal indoctrination disguised as an education. They come out of college with no marketable skill, just a piece of paper saying "you might have to train this twat slightly less, maybe".

                  If they were allowed to fail in primary education and denied entrance to secondary education, they would have no choice but to take up a trade. Which would be better for themselves and everyone around them. More skilled workers would do what you and your lot try to achieve through minimum wage laws. It would make skilled labor less valuable for having more of it and unskilled labor more valuable for having less of it. Plumbers would no longer make sixty or eighty-thousand dollars a year more than Wal-Mart cashiers. The products of skilled labor would become cheaper as well, thus more easily afforded by unskilled laborers. Those who are currently in skilled labor shortage markets for the money would simply find another market with a shortage because they're quite obviously brighter than the average bulb.

                  Save education for those who can make use of it. We gain nothing either individually or collectively by a gas station attendant vaguely remembering some Shakespeare or Keats. A lawnmower repairman's life is not enriched in any way by being able to eventually solve a quadratic equation. Education, simply put, is worthless unless it is made use of and most people barely use anything past sixth grade for the rest of their lives.

                  --
                  My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:57AM

                    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:57AM (#233569)

                    In other words, you have no idea what education is? Education is not for employment. That is "training". We can do that with animals or machines. Education is for minds. And failure is not an option. "From each, according to their ability; to each, according to their need."

                    • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:42PM

                      by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:42PM (#233765) Homepage Journal

                      Thank you, quoting Marx is exactly what I wanted to hear. You're now easily dismissed as a thief whose creed is nothing but greed dressed up as philosophy.

                      --
                      My rights don't end where your fear begins.
                      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @01:51AM

                        by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 09 2015, @01:51AM (#234033)

                        It is not Marx, it is Proudhon. See? Education. Now you owe me, you freeloading libertarian sociopath!!!

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @09:35PM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @09:35PM (#233451)

        The downward spiral in which we now find ourselves had a strong inflection point with the rise of Margaret Thatcher.
        "There is no such thing as society." [google.com]

        Thatcher's legacy is one of a reduced quality of life for the vast majority.
        Margaret Thatcher’s Criminal Legacy [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [dissidentvoice.org]

        Some of the hallmarks of Margaret Thatcher’s 11 year tenure [googleusercontent.com] (orig) [nbcnews.com]

        Earth has more than enough to go around.
        The sticking point is GREED.

        ...and the giant inflection point in the other direction came when 15 million USAians were put to work by FDR on the public payroll and they rebuild/expanded USA's infrastructure.
        Social democracies are a huge success where they exist.

        tyranny over individuals

        Oligarchy is not Democracy.
        ...and anyone who votes Republican is voting for disempowerment of the individual (illegal purging of voter rolls; reduced numbers of polling places; IDs required at the polls; etc.).

        -- gewg_

        • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Monday September 07 2015, @10:49PM

          by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Monday September 07 2015, @10:49PM (#233492) Homepage Journal

          ...and anyone who votes is voting for disempowerment of the individual

          FTFY. The only difference between Republicans and Democrats as far as wanting to take away your liberties is the Democrats have made it a key part of their platform whereas the Republicans at least try to hide it.

          The sticking point is GREED.

          Glad we agree. Or almost. You seem to think greed is just fine if it's bottom-up. The desire for something you haven't earned is evil no matter what your current net worth.

          Social democracies are a huge success where they exist.

          Really? I've yet to see one truly prosper. Yes, this includes the countries of Europe's fjord-riddled wang. They've been at it for around half a century and it's caused them nothing but decay of their societies and economies. They actually believe it immoral to be proud of your own hard-won accomplishments, if you can believe something as insane as that.

          --
          My rights don't end where your fear begins.
          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:10AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:10AM (#233545)

            The only difference

            You made me smile.

            greed is just fine if it's bottom-up

            I didn't mention it in the GP post but I have pointed out in another post in this thread and repeatedly at this site that USA had 5 decades of prosperity before Thatcherism/Reaganism.
            Before that period of prosperity / general egalitarianism, we had a decade of Republicanism which ended in a market crash and a Great Depression.

            The solution to that major downturn was JOBS.
            When the Capitalists weren't hiring, FDR found work on the public infrastructure[1] for millions and paid for that out of the excess wealth of the uber-rich (a 94 percent marginal tax on incomes over what would be a quarter $million these days).

            These days, as a practical matter, that excess wealth isn't taxed at all and is used instead by the uber-rich to manipulate / buy up the system.
            ..and, no, you and Joe "the Plummer" are not in that economic class.
            ("Joe" is a puffed-up fool who was just starting his apprenticeship--which he never finished.)

            We also had a viable system of tariffs that kept good-paying jobs here.

            My position is not one of advocating hand-outs.
            I want a vibrant economy where EVERYONE succeeds.
            (Ronald Reagan's dad was a drunk but FDR found him a job so that Ronnie's family wouldn't starve.)
            We had a working model.
            Let's return to that.

            [1] Have you seen our public infrastructure these days?
            ...and with interest rates at historic lows, it's an ideal time to do this.

            Social democracies [don't] truly prosper

            In Denmark no one earns less than $20/hr--and they didn't have to mandate anything to get there.
            USAian elites are simply greedy beyond compare.
            ...and USAian Capitalists and politicians don't understand The Multiplier Effect at all.

            hard-won accomplishments

            It is dishonest not to acknowledge that the hardest-working people in the USA make the least money and are the most exploited.

            The other day, a Soylentil mentioned that he is a self-employed contractor who is very prosperous.
            Another Soylentil noted that for every 1 such success story there are 100 more instances where someone did all the same preparation and didn't get the same outcome.

            -- gewg_

            • (Score: 2) by The Mighty Buzzard on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:51AM

              by The Mighty Buzzard (18) Subscriber Badge <themightybuzzard@proton.me> on Tuesday September 08 2015, @01:51AM (#233566) Homepage Journal

              I want a vibrant economy where EVERYONE succeeds.

              Want whatever you like. What you'll get if you have your way though is equality of poverty. The very rich simply will not pay. They will leave and take all that capital with them to a nation that does not want to steal what they have rightfully earned from them.

              the hardest-working people in the USA make the least money

              There's a reason for this. They're stupid as fucking rocks. If they weren't, they would be doing something where they had easier work and got paid more. You know, something that actually takes skill. They're not exploited, they're morons.

              Another Soylentil noted that for every 1 such success story there are 100 more instances where someone did all the same preparation and didn't get the same outcome.

              You should wash those numbers after you pull them out of your ass. That's unsanitary.

              --
              My rights don't end where your fear begins.
              • (Score: 1) by mmarujo on Tuesday September 08 2015, @04:06PM

                by mmarujo (347) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @04:06PM (#233815)

                [quote] The very rich simply will not pay. They will leave and take all that capital with them to a nation that does not want to steal what they have rightfully earned from them.[/quote]

                Can we please stop this misinformation from spreading? The only reason the very rich exist is because of the rest of "us". Nobody get rich alone in a deserted island. There is no money outside civilization.
                This kind of fear has corrupted too many people, already. It is FALSE!

                So, you're the richest man in the world, own trillions of dollars in money, and companies and property.
                First, if you are gonna leave the country, how do you intend to take you property with you?
                Ok, so you won't be taking your ranch/beach house with you, but you are taking your companies. What's the difference anyway? Is there any multinational corporation that has a "home country"? For the most part they have already moved.
                The only thing left is your money in the bank. Witch is just some numbers in a computer somewhere. If "we the people" had any balls, we'd just ignore "you" and "you" would become powerless.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @02:28AM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @02:28AM (#233574)

              Oh, come on. 5 decades of prosperity before Reagan?

              Seriously?

              Ask someone who actually lived through the seventies how prosperous that time was. Ask someone who actually lived through the seventies about the oil crisis, the Bretton-Woods breakdown, the frustrations with the US (and international) economy, and how much of that blame Carter took for promising to fix it and doing nothing effective. Why the hell do you think Reagan's Morning in America idea had such appeal?

              And as for Thatcher, she took over the reins of power in the Miserable Britain which had produced the punks. The punk movement. Remember those? The enraged, the disenfranchised, the disgusted no-hopers who didn't even think that the dreams of the hippies held anything for them?

              Go ahead and hold up the market crash, the fact is that the USA was richer during and after the crash than before Reagan took office. I know, because I was alive and paying attention at the time, this isn't abstract ideology from some website, this was the plain and simple reality.

              As for FDR, you should be more careful which examples you pick. He didn't do much to fix the economy, and did a lot to harm it. What fixed the economy was the strains of WWII, and subsequently the massive advances in technology which followed, thereby driving huge gains in productivity.

              Sorry, you just blew any economic credibility you ever had. Go back, learn what really happened, and try again.

              Furrfu!

    • (Score: 2) by Zz9zZ on Monday September 07 2015, @05:13PM

      by Zz9zZ (1348) on Monday September 07 2015, @05:13PM (#233348)

      Sweet jeebus, angry much? There was a reason I put "consumer" in the quotes... If you don't like the analogy then stop using it in the rest of your post. Provide more explanation please, your post is just an angry rant without much analysis.

      We need the flexibility of charter schools. Solve the problem of financial oversight and we're set.

      Oh, the equal opportunity ruining democracy bit... right. Since public schools will still be available, and every child will still receive an education, you are basically saying that public education right now is ruining effective democracy. I think I know what you're angry about, the idea that charters pick and choose their students. That isn't much different than public schools with honors classes.

      There are problems with both systems which need to be resolved. Public education is dominated by administrative control, and charter schools do not have enough oversight. Unless you can fix public schools these issues are not going away, no matter how angry you get.

      It seems this has become another partisan issue, so logic is out and rhetoric is in.

      --
      ~Tilting at windmills~
      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 08 2015, @12:14AM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @12:14AM (#233532) Journal

        Sweet jeebus, angry much?

        Sorry. It was because we have think of the children!

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @06:05AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @06:05AM (#233641)

      Perhaps you would be happier in China, Russia, Vietnam, Nazi or East Germany, or Venezuela, Aristarchus? Perhaps you're a public school teacher of some sort yourself? You remind me of a cross between Sheila Broflovski and one of Stalin, Lenin, or Mao (I can't decide which one).

      • (Score: 2) by aristarchus on Tuesday September 08 2015, @07:18AM

        by aristarchus (2645) on Tuesday September 08 2015, @07:18AM (#233662) Journal

        My dear AC: You think this is a left-right thing? Education is a public good, no matter where it occurs! Take the Isle of Samos, back in the day. Well before my time the philosopher Pythagoras taught anyone who was willing. Then the damn "educational reformers" showed up and convinced the King to set up charter schools. Run by fly-by-night Persians and Phoencians. Poor Pythagoras was forced to seek sanctuary in a cave, and later moved to the town of Croton, in Italy, for the Gods' sake! This has all happened before, and it has been the ruin of nations, and now it is happening again. You probably never heard of the Isle of Samos before this, did you? (Whether that is an educational lacuna on your part, or how far the fame of my home has fallen, it do not know.)

        But in any case, your attempted ad hominem is absurd on its face. Using a phrase like "public teacher" is redundant at best, perile at its worst: all teaching is public, if it were not, it would be Freemasonry or Scientology, or Libertarianism, not education at all. No wonder you cannot decide between Stalin, Lenin, or Mao. You really have no idea what ideologies they held, of what their views on education were. Take a look at how Pythagoras ran things at Croton. True, it did not end well, but he did set the precedent that allowed Plato to establish the first school in western history. Maybe a bit more education about education will change your mind about how much protest is too much.

  • (Score: 2) by frojack on Monday September 07 2015, @08:26AM

    by frojack (1554) on Monday September 07 2015, @08:26AM (#233187) Journal

    Washington is a hopelessly liberal state. You would think that would mean choice would prevail.
    Nope. It means only one solution, state mandates, teacher union controlled public schools.

    Funding Education [ballotpedia.org] is the number one mandate for the state as set forth in the constitution. They were so afraid of religious schools, that they essentially wrote the constitution that no public funds could possibly go to anything but the public schools. (Which are called "Common Schools".

    The entire revenue derived from the common school fund and the state tax for common schools shall be exclusively applied to the support of the common schools.

    It has nothing at all to do with control of curriculum as the teachers union insists. In fact the meaning of that section is not at all clear, and it might have been intended that the state would not fund "technical" schools out of the common school taxes.

    --
    No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 07 2015, @08:50AM

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 07 2015, @08:50AM (#233191) Journal

      "Washington is a hopelessly liberal state."

      Substitute the word "collectivist" for the word "liberal". Then play around with the definitions of "collectivist". Libs have a strong herding instinct. That is, they are afraid of individualism. They fear people who think differently. Thinking outside the box is an unhealthy, criminal trait. Can't have any charter schools teaching kids to think outside the box, now can we?

      Of course, the problem with that line of thought is, the charter schools don't exactly teach kids to think outside the box. They teach the kids to think inside of a different box.

      • (Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @09:09AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday September 07 2015, @09:09AM (#233197)

        "Washington is a hopelessly liberal state."

        Translation: "Washington is a state with higher levels of income, education, and humanity"?

      • (Score: 5, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Monday September 07 2015, @02:18PM

        by TheGratefulNet (659) on Monday September 07 2015, @02:18PM (#233275)

        Libs have a strong herding instinct. That is, they are afraid of individualism.

        today is labor day in the US but I didn't think it was backwards day, too.

        the so-called conservatives are the ones you are thinking of. they are the ones who embrace religion, many of whom believe in quite literally. the anti-gay party is all about 'conservatives', the anti-women party is the same, the anti-jew and anti-moslem: all so-called conservative principles. social safetynets such as welfare or unemployment: definitely 'lib' principles and the 'conservatives' would love to get rid of all social services since their only reply is 'just lift yourself up by your bootstraps!'.

        conservatives are anti-med MJ. they pretty much want to dictate how you will live and how you will pray (and the fact that you WILL pray, in their eyes, too; its not optional to them).

        with all that I just listed, you still want to go on derping about how liberals are the ones who don't think outside the box and who are stuck thinking the same old patterns that have gotton us actual HARM, over the years?

        liberals want change for the better. they are tired of business-as-usual. conservatives want to keep the 'old ways' the same with nothing new changing, no modernization, no new ideas. they reject new ideas like they reject anything newer than a 2000 yr old bit of storybook.

        --
        "It is now safe to switch off your computer."
        • (Score: 0, Troll) by Runaway1956 on Monday September 07 2015, @02:40PM

          by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday September 07 2015, @02:40PM (#233283) Journal

          Maybe when I'm old and senile, you can convert me to national socialism. By then I'll have forgotten what the Nazi party was all about.

          • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @02:34AM

            by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @02:34AM (#233575)

            Maybe when I'm old and senile, you can convert me to national socialism. By then I'll have forgotten what the Nazi party was all about.

            Apparently you've already forgotten.
            Let Pastor Martin Niemöller remind you of who the Nazis wanted to get rid of even more than jews:


                    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out—
                    Because I was not a Socialist.

                    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out—
                    Because I was not a Trade Unionist.

                    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—
                    Because I was not a Jew.

                    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

            • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @10:04PM

              by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 08 2015, @10:04PM (#233968)

              Re: National Socialist Workers Party
              You forgot to counter with "Democratic People's Republic of North Korea".
              There's also the Liberal Democratic Party of Russia.
              Clearly, you can call your entity anything you choose.
              It doesn't have to bear any relation to reality.

              It's very telling when uninformed fools like Runaway1956 say that "national socialism" has something to do with Socialism.
              Hint to the clueless:
              The Nazis were Fascist. That's about as far from Socialism as it gets.

              Another hint: The Union of Soviet Socialist Republics wasn't Socialist either.

              -- gewg_