Schools are pushing the "liberal agenda" by teaching algebra.

[JonTargaryen]

Claims Eric Bolling of Fox News (source). Because they teach the "distributive property".

You can't make things like this up.

[Kurioxan]

Hahahahah this is the silliest thing i've read in my life

"omg they are teaching kids about that... that... thing, called distribution and and sharing! COMMUNISTS!"

Even if it is bs, <3 you for sharing this and making me laugh my pants off

[Garnier Fructis]

Reminds me of the republican platform in Texas this year, where they were opposed to the teaching of critical thinking skills in public schools.

Pants on head retarded.

[Shop Ebay]

If it makes him feel any better, I have completely forgotten what the distributive property involves.

[s_bushido]

Do they not know what google is?

I mean, I can certainly understand not remembering what stuff like this is called (I didn't myself). But the internet is such a wonderful place for finding information!

The very first item when searching for "distributive property of multiplication" is:

Distributive property: The sum of two numbers times a third number is equal to the sum of each addend times the third number. For example 4 * (6 + 3) = 4*6 + 4*3

[Twotonsteak]

Claims Eric Bolling of Fox News (source). Because they teach the "distributive property".

You can't make things like this up.

Algebra Liberal? No.

Now lets go to CA where "Gay History" became a legally required course for all public schools in 2011. I'd say that's pretty damn Liberal myself.

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/22/138504...-the-classroom

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_898745.html


But I'm willing to bet that most of the sheeple who post on these forums will either ignore it or defend it as being "necessary" for some unknown reason.

EDIT:
And for reference a LOT of what you learn in Public Schools is WRONG. Half of it is a flat out lie. The other half, like the media, is bias and misleading.

[Garnier Fructis]

Hmm, I went and watched the video clip of this on youtube. Still think they're all pants on head retarded, but he wasn't attacking the distributive property per se, he was attacking the way it was presented. He took issue with the property being taught with money as distribution of wealth, instead of it being taught plain numbers.

[Kasierith]

Algebra Liberal? No.

Now lets go to CA where "Gay History" became a legally required course for all public schools in 2011. I'd say that's pretty damn Liberal myself.

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/22/138504...-the-classroom

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_898745.html

How is that a "gay history" course? Selective reading is selective. All it requires is that some information about gay individuals is added to social studies classes that already exist.

[ptwonline]

What did you expect from Fox News? These are the same guys calling out Gore for being a hypocrite and a traitor because he sold his tv network to an owner who also owns a network that showed some anti-US stuff (Al Jezeera Arabic).

Know who else partly owns an Arabic network showing anti-US stuff? Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News. Watch yesterday's Daily Show.

No, you can't make this stuff up. Reminds me off the time Glenn Beck went through all the twists and turns to show a communist agenda because of some art at Rockefeller Plaza. Since MSNBC broadcasts out of there, they must be supporting the commie agenda too. One problem with his theory: Fox News--and thus Beck at the time--was ALSO broadcasting out of part of Rockefeller Center. /facepalm

[Twotonsteak]

How is that a "gay history" course? Selective reading is selective. All it requires is that some information about gay individuals is added to social studies classes that already exist.

I have this completely nuts, mind-blowing, idea. Why not fix the history books before we worry about the sexuality of each figure there-in?

I mean they're still teaching kids that Columbus discovered America. Something that has been a known inaccuracy for many years. However instead of correcting these mistakes they're more worried about "acknowledging" homosexuals?

I'd say that's either Liberal, stupid, or both. I'll let you make the call.

And so far this thread is living up to my prediction. Horribly one-sided and hypocritical. Much like these forums. Everyone rails on Fox for being bias. But these forums are so obviously bias and it's considered OK. MSNBC is also obviously bias, as is the Huffington Post, and both are considered OK.

[s_bushido]

Hmm, I went and watched the video clip of this on youtube. Still think they're all pants on head retarded, but he wasn't attacking the distributive property per se, he was attacking the way it was presented. He took issue with the property being taught with money as distribution of wealth, instead of it being taught plain numbers.

They didn't stop to consider that kids might find relating it to money to be more interesting that relating it to...I don't know...apples. Instead they jump into their liberal bias conspiracy nonsense.

[Reeve]

Algebra Liberal? No.

Now lets go to CA where "Gay History" became a legally required course for all public schools in 2011. I'd say that's pretty damn Liberal myself.

http://www.npr.org/2011/07/22/138504...-the-classroom

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0..._n_898745.html


But I'm willing to bet that most of the sheeple who post on these forums will either ignore it or defend it as being "necessary" for some unknown reason.

EDIT:
And for reference a LOT of what you learn in Public Schools is WRONG. Half of it is a flat out lie. The other half, like the media, is bias and misleading.

Liberal, but I don't think it's bad. When talking about history in the Bay Area, I don't think there's anything wrong with teaching kids about Harvey Milk and George Moscone.

[Guilu]

Seems like they were more complaining about the header ("Redistributing Wealth") rather than the lesson itself being politically biased. Even though I don't necesarily approve of these people, I can see the point. That being said, if someone can enlighten me on how Bush going to Iraq claiming there were WMDs is "liberally-biased", please do.

[Garnier Fructis]

I honestly was never taught that Columbus discovered America in my History class. Perhaps that was a side effect of taking AP US, where they actually teach you history instead of tossing facts at you.

Seems like they were more complaining about the header ("Redistributing Wealth") rather than the lesson itself being politically biased. Even though I don't necesarily approve of these people, I can see the point. That being said, if someone can enlighten me on how Bush going to Iraq claiming there were WMDs is "liberally-biased", please do.

Ya, this. I read the article and watched the video on Youtube, and he wasn't attacking algebra, he was attacking how they decided to teach it. I still think it's a silly complaint, but it's not what the article makes it out to be.

They didn't stop to consider that kids might find relating it to money to be more interesting that relating it to...I don't know...apples. Instead they jump into their liberal bias conspiracy nonsense.

I'm not saying that it's not stupid. I think it's stupid. But that doesn't mean this article isn't misleading.

[Callei]

Jeez, not even math is safe from political tomfoolery, poppycock, hogwash, and silliness anymore.

[Arlon]

Algebra should be the first thing taught after multiplying and division. Its ridiculously easy if taught in a competant manner. Would take alot of hate for math away aswell, if it would start early in small steps.

[Reeve]

Algebra should be the first thing taught after multiplying and division. Its ridiculously easy if taught in a competant manner. Would take alot of hate for math away aswell, if it would start early in small steps.

Yeah I think Algebra could honestly be taught in 4th or 5th grade instead of 8th and 9th.

[Totori]

1+1 = 2.
Not
1+1 = One of us! One of us! One of us!
Get it right. D:
(Yes it's not the same math, but you get the idea, I think...)

Education should just be learning, not full of political crap shoved into it.

[Twotonsteak]

Liberal, but I don't think it's bad. When talking about history in the Bay Area, I don't think there's anything wrong with teaching kids about Harvey Milk and George Moscone.

When dealing in area's where homosexuals had a strong influence, such as the Bay area, I could see it being included in a "local history" type course. Mandating that the entire state involve courses beyond local history is, well, silly. Over-all someones sexuality shouldn't matter.

I mean most of our Founding Fathers were womanizing, cheating, alcoholics. Many of them fathered children out of wedlock. Some were, at one point or another, poor. And at least a couple owned slaves. None of which is generally taught in public school.

The public education system is in such a horrible state, full of misinformation and wrong information, that the addition of courses about gay history (over actually correcting what's already there) just speaks volumes of how much our government cares.

[Omegalega]

I have this completely nuts, mind-blowing, idea. Why not fix the history books before we worry about the sexuality of each figure there-in?

I mean they're still teaching kids that Columbus discovered America. Something that has been a known inaccuracy for many years. However instead of correcting these mistakes they're more worried about "acknowledging" homosexuals?

I'd say that's either Liberal, stupid, or both. I'll let you make the call.

And so far this thread is living up to my prediction. Horribly one-sided and hypocritical. Much like these forums. Everyone rails on Fox for being bias. But these forums are so obviously bias and it's considered OK. MSNBC is also obviously bias, as is the Huffington Post, and both are considered OK.

When the civil rights movement ended decades ago, and people wanted to start teaching about it in history books, guess what people like you claimed? "We're pushing the liberal agenda". It's the same cycle over and over. Whenever something is being taught in school that conservatives don't agree with (no matter how factual it is), they claim it to be apart of the "liberal agenda".

And the fact that you're defending Fox News makes your post that much more hilarious.