2020 Election

This sort of thing is easily verifiable as it pertains to his history in the Senate - here, Politico covered this in 2015

How a Young Joe Biden Turned Liberals Against Integration

Whether you think his history of opposing busing is relevant in today's world is one thing and you're entitled to your opinion, but you cant dismiss it as some outlandish conspiracy produced by the Washington Examiner. Regardless of whether or not some dubious sources have presented this for their own means, it doesnt change the fact that it happened and is on record

And he didnt oppose busing because he supported black pride. He opposed it because of pressure from his white voters who vehemently opposed it.

Now, as to whether Biden should be judged for something that happened in the 70s - I believe I spoke very briefly in a previous post about busing where I grew up. It didnt just involve busing black kids to white neighborhoods. White kids were bused to schools in predominately black neighborhoods too. This practice was still happening in the 90s when I started attending elementary school in a school that was once a segregated school for blacks during segregation. I loved that school and I have seen the benefits of forced and aggressive desegregation through busing practices firsthand. I have a lot of appreciation for those in power who were brave enough to oppose the angry white mob who opposed busing practices and enforce it anyways. Joe Biden wasnt one of those brave people. Maybe that isnt relevant in 2019 but I do believe it speaks to his character.

 

The thing about busing that is so often overlooked is the way it basically kicked the problem down the road instead of actually solving it. The numbers for segregated school systems were impossible to hide. It was clear the white schools were doing better than the black schools. Everybody was starting to notice and town hall meetings were packed with confused and angry parents (unlike the recent Atlanta Public Schools cheating scandal).

The plan the school monopoly came up with was to push hard on integration and then force it through transportation. To make poorly-performing schools APPEAR to be improving, just mix in some higher-scoring white kids. They selected the kids based on grades, so the lower-performing white districts were the first to catch buses. Their counterparts in the black schools caught buses to schools that were within a mile of the homes of the white kids being bused to the black schools.

They did this because a sudden jump in the numbers would be both suspicious and counterproductive to the core purpose for all of this, to save the jobs of school personnel and get their heads off the chopping block. It needed to LOOK like grades were improving at the worst schools in the nation. So they mixed the stupid white kids and the stupid black kids while funneling the better resources to the school districts of the wealthy and well-connected. Standards at the desegregated schools were also relaxed, as needed, to keep the grade ticker gradually moving upward.

A couple of decades later we had high school graduates who could barely read (Jerry Garcia sang about this). But by this time the education monopoly had become a governmental powerhouse with substantial political pull. It was a sacred cow that only the foolish dared question lest they be removed from the meeting by a cop or have their career halted in its tracks. Teachers who questioned anything uncomfortable went on a list and eventually out the door to pursue marketing or arts careers.

I went to 2 schools south of Atlanta during 10th grade. In Peachtree City, I learned about adding, subtraction and multiplying. In Senoia, I learned about Plussing, Minus-ing and Times-ing. These schools were only a few miles apart. But the district lines came into play. I had no idea that teachers could be so stupid until 10th grade. As soon as I could, I lied about my age and became a sailor.

Today in Georgia, kids don't have recess. If they're not in an athletic program (of which there are only a few slots out of hundreds of students), they barely get any exercise. They're made to sit in desks all day long from about age 5 to age 17 (or so), during critical physical development years.

 

I'm glad you had a good experience with busing for purposes of racial integration. Many parents, including African-Americans, complained about their kids being transported long distances from home into strange neighborhoods. I wouldn't describe a politician who questioned aspects of the practice as favoring segregation or opposing integration or turning "liberals against integration". He opposed busing, but favored integration by other means--as is evident from his support for affirmative action. The byline for Professor Sokol's article was therefore inaccurate and reflects efforts of progressive Democrats to keep him out of the 2016 race.

 

To be fair Sokol wrote a book on the subject of segregation and race in the northeast so his interest in this topic clearly goes beyond keeping Biden out of the 2016 race.

Affirmative action doesnt really affect public schools for k5-12th grade. If Biden's stance against busing was truly because of concerns made by his black constituents, rather than demands raised by his white constituents, what policies did he support at the time to achieve educational equality in historically black schools?

 

Polls show that if the election were held today, biden, sanders, and warren would defeat trump.

 

You're not wrong. Desegregation, like most things, required a multi prong approach in order to ensure schools in black neighborhoods were not left behind. Some school districts did well with this and some didn't

 

To be fair, Bernie is vulnerable on the gun issue, if we want to go rummaging through closets for skeletons--especially his support for the awful Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, that gives gun manufacturers immunity from lawsuits..
Analysis: When the NRA liked Bernie Sanders best
https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...95c05608059_story.html?utm_term=.e21ecbf5212d
Protection Of Lawful Commerce In Arms Act: The Controversial Gun Law Bernie Sanders Voted For Has Kept Families From Winning Lawsuits
As I feared, the quest for purity may grease the skids for a second term for Saint Donald.

 

What sort of purity do you have in mind?

What I have noticed is that a lot of leftists seem to be looking for a unicorn. Which is why the field has become stacked into a circus that eclipses the "Diversity, but we're still backing the honkey" show the republicans put on in 2016. I think the varietal left should vet this all out quickly, before a 2-tier Kiddy Table debate schedule occurs. It seemed stupid when republicans did it, so I don't see how it will work any better for democrats.

Of course the media will love it. Every candidate gives a reporter and a camera operator a purpose. Some are worth whole teams of cameras and mics with bimbos (and bim-bros) spouting whatever hits their earpiece. But there's a risk here that the press doesn't give a flying crap about; too many candidates could means multiple and even overlapping scandals.

I actually don't think Shotgun Joe is going to be injured much by the gun issue. As for the protection act, he can always claim it has morphed into something he doesn't recognize anymore. That's almost as good as having "evolved" on the issue!

 

I think that Biden has a better chance against the incumbent than Sanders, and if you look at what the television is reporting most pollsters say their primary interest in the election this time around is to avoid a repeat.

 

Sanders is rye toast.

 

I think there are more than enough skeletons(amongst all the candidates) to outfit a Halloween party.

 

Pete Buttigieg just went off the deep end in his comments about needing to remove Jefferson from public buildings and monuments. https://nypost.com/2019/05/18/pete-buttigieg-wants-thomas-jefferson-events-and-buildings-renamed/
Sheer fanaticism, and a projection of current sensibilities onto figures of the past. Yes, Jefferson (Mr. "All Men Are Created Equal" owned slaves and had sex with one of them--a fact that his political opponents back in the day tried unsuccessfully to use against him. But he also authored the Declaration of Independence, was a leading influence on separation of church and state, and was undoubtedly one of the leading intellects among the founders of our republic. Any Democrat who joins Buttigieg in this Quixotic venture will be walking into a buzz saw and contributing to the party's image of being fanatical ideologues.Buttigieg Backs Idea of Erasing Thomas Jefferson's Name from Buildings

 

I'm not sure why we're even supposed to be paying attention to Pete Buttigieg. Smart move, I guess, running for president. Now he's a somebody who could be anybody.

 

and, I may be wrong, but I don't believe Jefferson was a deist.

I really haven't formed an opinion about buttigieg, but it was interesting that he got a standing ovation at a townhall meeting sponsored by Fox news. In fact, trump got pissed about fox having anything to do with it.

 

If not, he came close. In the Declaration of Independence Jefferson invoked "Nature's God," not specifically the Christian God. And the Jefferson Bible purged scripture of all references to miracles. He rejected the Trinity and eternal hellfire.

 

People like him have been discrediting the founding fathers (especially Jefferson) for eons over the fact that some of them owned slaves. He's the first one who was openly transparent about these opinions. Just more propaganda to hate some of the greatest people in history and cause resentment toward American cultural heritage.

I can't think of a pre-industrial society that didn't have slaves. Thank god for the industrial revolution.

 

"god" had nothing to do with the industrial revolution.

 

Defying the Founding Fathers is as bad as demonizing them. They were humans, many (like Jefferson) great humans, with flaws we should acknowledge. If we tear down monuments to anyone with character flaws, we won't have any monuments. JFK was a womanizer. Martin Luther King was an adulterer, Lincoln was a racist, so was Teddy Roosevelt, Washington was a slave owner, etc., etc. There goes Mount Rushmore!

 

To be fair he's not talking about removing monuments, just changing the name of a dinner. The NY Post is essentially a right leaning tabloid so of course they're going a blow his remarks out of proportion

(I dont care about Buttigieg either way but we should be fair and keep his remarks in context)

 

Also while we're on the topic, I've never liked Mount Rushmore myself. It's always struck me as a big middle finger from the US government to indigenous tribes of America