Based on the standards set by previous secretaries of the executive branch, I can confirm she is highly qualified for the position.

 

I can also confirm John Lewis is highly unqualified as a congress member, and should be tested for senility.

 

All in favor, say Aye.

Highly qualified?

 

For education?

---

Highly qualified?

 

For education?

 

Yes. Have you not seen her record? Tons of experience.

 

The issue you have is she doesn't have the same positions you value. Doesn't mean she isn't qualified.

---

Yes. Have you not seen her record? Tons of experience.

 

The issue you have is she doesn't have the same positions you value. Doesn't mean she isn't qualified.

Well I teach in a public school....One of the best on the east coast so I guess we don't hold the same value in public education.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, she feels that it should be up to the states whether guns should be allowed in schools? Because of grizzlies?

---

She's never attended or put her kids in public schools. How can she claim to know the challenges or assess the potential solutions in public schools?


She's never had a student loan or had her kids responsible for a student loan. She is supposed to know how to fix a predatory student loan program?


She is oblivious to the ideological debates the education community has been having on how to best improve our schools. Oblivious that these debates have been even taking place. Grossly unqualified.


Her background and backers lead me to believe she would attempt to advance religious doctrine in the general curriculum. That in and of itself is a disqualifier for me. Her utter lack of experience in the field should be obvious to anyone who is looking.

---

Only a chump boos the home team!

Well I teach in a public school....One of the best on the east coast so I guess we don't hold the same value in public education.

 

Unless I'm mistaken, she feels that it should be up to the states whether guns should be allowed in schools? Because of grizzlies?

 

She isn't wrong. There should be more guns in schools. What are you supposed to do when some gangbanger barges in to shoot up his rivals or a wacko goes on a shooting spree and your only armed security is on the other side of the school? In very rural areas, animal attacks are also likely. So what she said wasn't incorrect.

 

Again, she is highly qualified. You simply disagree with her positions.

 

Good to know you are a teacher though. Whats the deal with our scores? We spend more on students per capita than any other nation, yet our students score lower than third-world nations. Perhaps you are part of the problem? Good thing Betsy is coming in to shake up the status quo.

---

She isn't wrong. There should be more guns in schools. What are you supposed to do when some gangbanger barges in to shoot up his rivals or a wacko goes on a shooting spree and your only armed security is on the other side of the school? In very rural areas, animal attacks are also likely. So what she said wasn't incorrect.

 

Again, she is highly qualified. You simply disagree with her positions.

 

Good to know you are a teacher though. Whats the deal with our scores? We spend more on students per capita than any other nation, yet our students score lower than third-world nations. Perhaps you are part of the problem? Good thing Betsy is coming in to shake up the status quo.

Well I teach PE and I can only comment on what happens in my school so there's that.

 

Guns have no place being in a school. Instead of arguments that lead to fist fights you'll have shootings taking place. If you are honestly going to allow young teenagers to carry a gun, why not let elementary school kids carry a gun? I'm sure you won't have any accidental shootings at all. Heck. Let's give them drivers licenses while we are at it.

 

I have no clue why the scores are low. 

---

She's never attended or put her kids in public schools. Not an argument.


 

How can she claim to know the challenges or assess the potential solutions in public schools? Research and experience working with those who do.



She's never had a student loan or had her kids responsible for a student loan. She is supposed to know how to fix a predatory student loan program? Research and experience working with those who do.



She is oblivious to the ideological debates the education community has been having on how to best improve our schools. Oblivious that these debates have been even taking place. Grossly unqualified. Not an argument.



Her background and backers lead me to believe she would attempt to advance religious doctrine in the general curriculum. That in and of itself is a disqualifier for me. Her utter lack of experience in the field should be obvious to anyone who is looking. Not an argument.

---

She isn't wrong. There should be more guns in schools. What are you supposed to do when some gangbanger barges in to shoot up his rivals or a wacko goes on a shooting spree and your only armed security is on the other side of the school? In very rural areas, animal attacks are also likely. So what she said wasn't incorrect.


Again, she is highly qualified. You simply disagree with her positions.


Good to know you are a teacher though. Whats the deal with our scores? We spend more on students per capita than any other nation, yet our students score lower than third-world nations. Perhaps you are part of the problem? Good thing Betsy is coming in to shake up the status quo.

What do you do for a living? Do you have kids? What kind of school do they go to? What kind of educational background do you have?

---

DeVos isn't qualified.  To say that she is to be completely oblivious to her answers last night.   She had no idea what IDEA was.  She doesn't know the issues facing public schools because she's never attended one, her kids have never attended one, and she's never worked at one either.  She won't stand up for students with disabilities.  She won't protect public education.  But again, conservatives will eat it up because they hate public education.  Anyone who will destroy it is just fine with them.  They hate public education because they hate anything the government does unless it's the military or the police.  She won't even agree to EQUAL ACCOUNTABILITY.  


I mean I disagree with James Mattis as Secretary of Defense--but at least he's qualified for the position.  And I'm going to guess he'll be competent.  So I'm okay with the choice of "Mad Dog Mattis" as Secretary of Defense. 

 

I don't particularly agree with Elaine Chao either.  I think she's too connected to her husband, Old Turtle Face.  But again, she's not a bad choice for secretary of transportation.  She's qualified, and competent.  So I'm okay with that choice too.


I don't think DeVos is remotely qualified to be Secretary of Education. 

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

What do you do for a living? Do you have kids? What kind of school do they go to? What kind of educational background do you have?

 

Whoa there NSA. Getting a bit personal here? I'll share some information, though.

 

Engineer, a lot, home school, graduate.

 

What about you? What do you do to that gives yourself a qualified opinion?

---

The problem with education today is that we don't give teachers enough input.  Instead of asking teachers how to fix things, we ask billionaires and politicians.  This leads to things like common core, and no child left behind.  Maybe next time you want surgery done, you should get a lawyer to do it.  Or maybe the next time you need your house repaired, ask a politician.  Surely they'll be able to fix it better than a contractor, right?  

---

I was wrong about Trent Baalke. 

DeVos isn't qualified.  To say that she is to be completely oblivious to her answers last night.   She had no idea what IDEA was.  She doesn't know the issues facing public schools because she's never attended one, her kids have never attended one, and she's never worked at one either.  She won't stand up for students with disabilities.  She won't protect public education.  But again, conservatives will eat it up because they hate public education.  Anyone who will destroy it is just fine with them.  They hate public education because they hate anything the government does unless it's the military or the police.  She won't even agree to EQUAL ACCOUNTABILITY.  


I mean I disagree with James Mattis as Secretary of Defense--but at least he's qualified for the position.  And I'm going to guess he'll be competent.  So I'm okay with the choice of "Mad Dog Mattis" as Secretary of Defense. 

 

I don't particularly agree with Elaine Chao either.  I think she's too connected to her husband, Old Turtle Face.  But again, she's not a bad choice for secretary of transportation.  She's qualified, and competent.  So I'm okay with that choice too.

I don't think DeVos is remotely qualified to be Secretary of Education. 

 

They hate public education because public education sucks. We have one of the WORST public educational systems for a first-world nation, and we spend more on it than any other nation by a huge margin. She didn't send her kids to receive a public education, and neither do I. It is a terrible, ineffective system.

 

Want to see two great public educational systems? Look at Japan, who models their system after ours from the 50s, and Finland, who models theirs after a Montessori style. Both are WAY more effective at public education than the US, and spend way less. They don't have or need a massive, expensive bureaucracy of ineffective policies and educators to educate their children, and neither should we.

---

Well I teach PE and I can only comment on what happens in my school so there's that.

 

Guns have no place being in a school. Instead of arguments that lead to fist fights you'll have shootings taking place. If you are honestly going to allow young teenagers to carry a gun, why not let elementary school kids carry a gun? I'm sure you won't have any accidental shootings at all. Heck. Let's give them drivers licenses while we are at it.

 

I have no clue why the scores are low. 

 

Nobody is saying that students would be allowed to carry guns in schools.  For one thing it is illegal for a high school aged student to own/carry a handgun.  Second of all, there is no reason why a school employee that is qualified and posses a concealed carry permit should not be able to carry at the school.

 

For what it's worth.  When I was in 5th grade I took a Hunter's Safety course at school (extra curricular) where real weapons were brought in and handled by those of us learning.  It was taught by my PE teacher.

 

DeVos isn't qualified.  To say that she is to be completely oblivious to her answers last night.   She had no idea what IDEA was.  She doesn't know the issues facing public schools because she's never attended one, her kids have never attended one, and she's never worked at one either.  She won't stand up for students with disabilities.  She won't protect public education.  But again, conservatives will eat it up because they hate public education.  Anyone who will destroy it is just fine with them.  They hate public education because they hate anything the government does unless it's the military or the police.  She won't even agree to EQUAL ACCOUNTABILITY.  


I mean I disagree with James Mattis as Secretary of Defense--but at least he's qualified for the position.  And I'm going to guess he'll be competent.  So I'm okay with the choice of "Mad Dog Mattis" as Secretary of Defense. 

 

I don't particularly agree with Elaine Chao either.  I think she's too connected to her husband, Old Turtle Face.  But again, she's not a bad choice for secretary of transportation.  She's qualified, and competent.  So I'm okay with that choice too.

I don't think DeVos is remotely qualified to be Secretary of Education. 

 

The bottom line is the post and the whole department needs to be eliminated.  Education is not a requirement of the Federal Government.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

She isn't wrong. There should be more guns in schools. What are you supposed to do when some gangbanger barges in to shoot up his rivals or a wacko goes on a shooting spree and your only armed security is on the other side of the school? In very rural areas, animal attacks are also likely. So what she said wasn't incorrect.


Again, she is highly qualified. You simply disagree with her positions.


Good to know you are a teacher though. Whats the deal with our scores? We spend more on students per capita than any other nation, yet our students score lower than third-world nations. Perhaps you are part of the problem? Good thing Betsy is coming in to shake up the status quo.

How are people going to know the exact time and place a shooter will appear? How will law enforcement know who is a good guy from a bad guy when everyone has a gun? I'm convinced you don't do much thinking.

---

Nobody is saying that students would be allowed to carry guns in schools. For one thing it is illegal for a high school aged student to own/carry a handgun. Second of all, there is no reason why a school employee that is qualified and posses a concealed carry permit should not be able to carry at the school.


For what it's worth. When I was in 5th grade I took a Hunter's Safety course at school (extra curricular) where real weapons were brought in and handled by those of us learning. It was taught by my PE teacher.



The bottom line is the post and the whole department needs to be eliminated. Education is not a requirement of the Federal Government.

And an educated populace is one of the pillars of a strong democracy. I graduated from the 3rd ranked school in the nation. Paxon SAS...It was second only to Stanton in Jacksonville. Both were public schools. Don't tell me it can't work.

---

They hate public education because public education sucks. We have one of the WORST public educational systems for a first-world nation, and we spend more on it than any other nation by a huge margin. She didn't send her kids to receive a public education, and neither do I. It is a terrible, ineffective system.

 

Want to see two great public educational systems? Look at Japan, who models their system after ours from the 50s, and Finland, who models theirs after a monitorial style. Both are WAY more effective at public education than the US, and spend way less. They don't have or need a massive, expensive bureaucracy of ineffective policies and educators to educate their children, and neither should we.

Don't expect liberals to understand common sense. It's like trying to teach a cat to bark.

---

What lies behind us, and what lies before us are tiny matters compared to what lies within us.







 

How are people going to know the exact time and place a shooter will appear? How will law enforcement know who is a good guy from a bad guy when everyone has a gun? I'm convinced you don't do much thinking.

 

Who is everyone? You can't own a long gun under the age of 18 or a hand gun under the age of 21 (in most states I believe). The only ones with guns will be the school staff, armed security, or the assailant. If a shooter appears anywhere, and the nearest staff member has a gun, then he can take action instead of waiting for the armed security on the other side of the school.

 

It is quite simple, really. I'm convinced you are just plain dumb.

---

Who is everyone? You can't own a long gun under the age of 18 or a hand gun under the age of 21 (in most states I believe). The only ones with guns will be the school staff, armed security, or the assailant. If a shooter appears anywhere, and the nearest staff member has a gun, then he can take action.


It is quite simple, really. I'm convinced you are just plain dumb.

And knowing that as a shooter how would that stop you from killing as many people as possible, especially if you have proper and adequate training. Heck you don't even need a gun...someone could plant a bomb for mass casualties if they wanted to. Is a gun going to stop that?

---

Who is everyone? You can't own a long gun under the age of 18 or a hand gun under the age of 21 (in most states I believe). The only ones with guns will be the school staff, armed security, or the assailant. If a shooter appears anywhere, and the nearest staff member has a gun, then he can take action instead of waiting for the armed security on the other side of the school.

 

It is quite simple, really. I'm convinced you are just plain dumb.

 

Pretty much.  Just recently a police officer's life was saved by a person with a gun.

---

There are 10 kinds of people in this world.  Those who understand binary and those who don't.

And knowing that as a shooter how would that stop you from killing as many people as possible, especially if you have proper and adequate training. Heck you don't even need a gun...someone could plant a bomb for mass casualties if they wanted to. Is a gun going to stop that?

 

A gun acts as both a deterrent and an opportunity for the staff to stop or slow-down a potential shooter. As opposed to now, where you literally can't do anything but hide or be killed.

 

Correct, you can't stop a bomb, though that is an entirely different subject considering bombs are banned for public use already, everywhere. You also can't stop a student from hijacking a truck and crashing it into a populated part of the school.

---