Samuel ✡️ 🗽

Leftists can never be bigoted, by definition!! 😂

A Trump voter whose son was killed by ICE is calling for an end to "abuse and impunity" at the agency "I just want to know what happened," Rachel Reyes told CBS News during her first TV interview since the death of her son, Ruben Ray Martinez, a U.S. citizen shot and killed by an ICE agent in Texas la...

“Rachel Reyes' son, 23-year-old American citizen Ruben Ray Martinez, was shot and killed by a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent nearly one year ago. But she said she's still trying to understand why.”

The ‘why’ is beczuse his name was Martinez. You voted to murder your son.

Trixie, Mabel & Millie celebrating Noem's firing like it's Xmas!

#JusticeForCricket 🐶 🔫

He was disgruntled about all kinds of things. That’s why he supported Simon de Montfort’s rebellion against the crown, and then immediately turned around and shanked de Montfort in the back after they won and turned the kingdom back over to Longshanks.

The fact that you raging fucking idiots have the audacity to even publicly voice your dumbass illiterate view of what history education is supposed to be is indicated of the way history education is treated in this country and perceived by the average person.

You people are fucking pathetic.

and of course you moderate language and vocabulary based on what the students you’re working with can understand.

Fundamentally, history education is the same at every level of school. At its core, it is about learning the SKILLS of analysis, which are transferable to nearly every aspect of life.

the conclusions we’ve drawn to another person, in a way that they will understand even if they haven’t analyzed to is particular source themself?

These are all things that we do daily, in any halfway decent history class. The complexity of the sources varies at different grade and learning levels

What value can we draw from this source, based on all those other questions we’ve been asking throughout our analysis? What conclusions can we draw about this source, and how does that relate to the broader context of the lesson/unit in which we were reading them?

And finally, how do we communicate

what is says, based on our own knowledge of the context in which it was written and the person who wrote it? What limitations do we, as historians, experience when examining this particular source? Are there other contemporary sources to compare it against to look for contradictions or similarities?

in writing it? What do we know about this person through historical context or background knowledge, that gives us some insight into their motivations or beliefs or biases or desires?

What does hve source actually say, what is its content? What are the limitations that we can understand about

And just to spell it out for you, you raging stupid sack of shit, I provide students with many different kinds of sources throughout various lessons. And I teach them how to analyze those sources. Why did this person write this source? Who were they writing it to be read by? What was their purpose

When was the last time you set foot in classroom, I wonder?

Honestly the degree to which the average person knows fuck-all about how to conduct even the most basic form of research into any subject, history included, is astoundingly bad, as you are kindly providing evidence of here.

People who refuse to vaccinate their children should be treated the same as people who literally beat their children. Willfully withholding medical care is a form of abuse that, in my view, is even worse than physical violence.

This is just an extension of our social value that children are the property of their parents, which is why we have this insane view that parents should be allowed to make unilateral medical decisions on their children’s’ behalf, even to the point of killing or permanently maiming the child.

No. People refusing to vaccinate their children harms everybody.

They can be as hesitant they fucking want, as long as they do what they’re obligated to do.

I don’t care about their feelings or their opinions. I care about their children being vaccinated.

Agree you need to beat her, but to do that you have to win the primary first, which seems like it would be easier to do if you would just come out and attack your opponent for being a Nazi, which he is. bsky.app/profile/capi...

Susan Collins has gotten all too comfortable staying silent as the President takes a wrecking ball to our Constitution.

This moment demands someone who will fight back. I've stood up to him before, and I'm not afraid to do it again in the Senate.

Is this a joke?

The entire premise of the OP’s original statement is about coddling their feelings and sensibilities to try and cajole them into doing the right thing.

I. Don’t. Care. About. Changing. Their. Minds.

How much more simply can I spell that out? Fuck their opinions. Fuck their ignorance. Fuck their “I’m a parent, I know best.”

They can either vaccinate their children, or they can keep them home 100% of the time like Bubble Boy. How is this complex?

“In the absence of your plan, what’s your plan?”

I’m not certain if you’re trying to make a joke, or if this is a real question.

The reason we’re in this situation is because you dipshits are trying to good-faith debate people who are lying narcissists who will always move the goalposts.

If I walk around infecting people with HIV, due to refusing to practice safe sex because there’s a lot of conflicting information out there over how HIV gets spread, do I deserve any sympathy? Or should I be thrown in fucking prison?

Spoiler alert: it’s the latter.

Make vaccines mandatory again.

These dipshits can be as “hesitant” as they want, but if they want to send their children to school or take them out in public anywhere, they should have to get them vaccinated.

And if they don’t like it, they can shut the fuck up and do it anyway.

I don’t care about coddling the narcissism or alleviating “hesitancy” of these parents.

I just care about their fucking children getting preventable illnesses, and worse, spreading those illnesses to people who AREN’T ignorant narcissists and are genuinely immunocompromised in some way.

I agree this is difficult to refute, but I would throw out that outside the mainstream, if you look to the public comms of the people *doing* it, they do in fact admit this, given that they *just posted* that they think they are like Kylo Ren and Heisenberg

Like I said. They’re just bad parents.

so, for the record, the government says that the current war is a thing that the following people would do:
Jimmy "Saul Goodman" McGill
Goku
Walter "Heisenberg" White
Deadpool aka Wade Wilson
Ben "Kylo Ren" Solo

but they think me having changed my name to a woman's name makes me the weird one

Boo. Fucking. Hoo.

None of that is any excuse for allowing your child to contract a preventable illness.

If I run someone over while driving, and my excuse was that there’s just a lot of conflicting information out there about speed limits and traffic laws, would I deserve any sympathy whatsoever?

If I’m ignorant of traffic laws and I kill someone as a result, am I less of a criminal, just because I was too ignorant to find out what the law was?

Holy fuck, I don’t understand how anyone can defend these people. They’re willfully killing/maiming their own children.

“I don’t think anti-vaccine parents are bad parents.”

I do. If you do not get your child vaccinated for ANY reason other than that they are ineligible due to some other medical condition, YOU ARE A BAD PARENT.

Period, full stop. Your ignorance is not an excuse. Your religion is not an excuse. You’re just a bad parent and your children deserve better.

They’re not. It’s a game, they’re just racist.