houseoftolstoy @[email protected]

I have most certainly noticed that our household grocery costs have been higher these days. I have said before and will say again, I can accept this as the "new normal," even if I am not happy with it. I will take more expensive food over no food any day.

So I oppose any calls for price controls, as that will bring about the no food scenario I actually fear.

I don't claim to know all the details of what all happened with 9/11, but I and others are suspicious of the official story and suspect that there is a lot of lies being told.

This "debunking" does not help his case when he insists that the passengers and flight attendants would have to be in on the conspiracy.

No you retard. They did not know because they would have been considered acceptable losses by those carrying out the conspiracy. And only a few people from each agency would be needed.

Anyone who ever uses the term "media literacy" is just a shill for legacy media.

"Do you have a reliable source?" basically just means that they want you to have an "approved" news organization as a source.

I recall a Zerohedge article that laid out all the sources of information directly on the Rolling Stone Ivermectin/gunshot wounds in Oklahoma story being bullshit, but to a libshit this still was not good enough because it was not from a "reliable source."

But do not think that this makes Obama "based" in any way. He still kissed Israel's ass, just not in the way that the Neo-Cons and Zionists wanted. This seems a lot like how Obama would try to do things, unlike Biden, the self proclaimed Zionist himself (before he became a drooling zombie). I would also suspect if it was entirely Biden's cabinet in control, their overrepresented Jewish members would be far more Zionist in their end actions.

Seeing an article like this from the State run media only reinforces the theory that Obama is the one running things behind the scenes. Why do I say this?

I read a book called "The Amateur," and the author devoted the most pages to Obama not kissing Israel's ass properly, saying he was way too idealistic about bringing peace between Israel and Palestine and doing a poor job at that.

Articles like this tell me in spite of the very Jewish cabinet in the Biden admin, Obama is the shot caller.

Instead of acknowledging many of these harsh truths, we have this stupid debate of the standardized tests. How about we stop excusing bad teachers and bad parents when they fail to set the stage for the children to achieve and learn? And how about we abandon the idea of equality and accept that some people are just going to be stupid? That is the whole reason we have this debate, because some people get butthurt when they see achievement gaps and cannot accept the truth.

And finally, we have the students themselves. Sometimes, you just have someone too stupid to succeed, no matter the other two factors.

The thing is, bringing up ANY of these factors as a cause for students not achieving and not learning is going to cause someone's feelings to be hurt.

"How dare you criticize teachers! They are heroes who are doing a wonderful job!"

"How dare you criticize single mothers! They are heroes doing their best!"

"My son is not stupid! The system is to blame!"

Therefore, attacking the standardized test as the root problem is a red herring. The root problem are the 3 factors.

With teachers, yes, we have some that just plain suck at their jobs. This will make it much harder for students to reach their full learning potential.

Though teachers (bad or not) are not able to be fully effective if the parents are not actively involved with their own children. We see many frustrated parents blaming the schools/teachers when they do nothing themselves.

We can look at overall aptitude without these sorts of tests. How well can students read, do math, write? These can be evaluated without an official "test." But the problem is, we are still back at square one when it comes to evaluating results. That is, we come to find out that through one or more factors of teachers, parents, or student inherent aptitude, the students still are not learning well even if you get rid of the use of standardized tests.

These standardized tests are meant to be a benchmark, a way to indicate how much students have learned.

Those that criticize the use of these tests do have a point that they are not all that good at determining if learning is going on, as well as the fact that "teaching to the test" is a common tactic used by some teachers/schools.

There is a problem though. What alternative benchmark do we have to work with? Usually, this is where the conversations stops, because opponents have no solutions.

An example of a failure to acknowledge reality leading to bad results: the whole standardized test debate with students.

There are a number of factors that could lead to good or bad test scores. The quality of teachers, the aptitude of students, the commitment by parents. All of these factors are necessary for students to be succeeding at learning. But how do we test this? An quick (though imperfect way) is the standardized tests.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ow3ao6YsCgQ

Watched this video recently. The channel seems to have some interesting guests, and you could argue this one too. Though she spent quite a bit of time saying what could be said in shorter and simpler terms:

Women have unrealistic and idiotic standards for men. Women focus on a lot of stupid bullshit that is unimportant for finding a lasting relationship.

Granted, men can be guilty at times too, but not to the extent women are.