Here's the thing... teachers don't just get to decide what they teach. Curriculum is decided by the state. Districts have say in scope and sequence. Depending on the school, teachers have say in the how, but the what is taught is decided at the state level. You'd be surprised how many people don't know this, but I'm sure Pompeo knows it. This is just him spouting bullshit to throw red meat to the morons. It would be maddening if it wasn't so sad. And yes, it is playing a part in why teachers are leaving the profession.
This is a problem I've had since April 2020. There has never been a transparent metric for what we will use to reevaluate mandates. There was never a number proposed to say we lift mandates when we hit X. At least I don't remember a number being communicated. At this point it looks like people in charge are saying things seem better, so we can move on. Does that mean that our current numbers (whatever numbers they're using) are the limit? If things take a turn are we headed back to more mandates? I just wish that if we were lifting (or imposing) mandates we had the data presented why it was the appropriate decision. I don't think things will get worse, I do think everything is heading in the preferred direction, but I also believe that we could have the worst wave yet hit us and people would still be whining about masks.
I took it as the only thing worse than a titty-baby is a titty-baby that acts vindicated for their titty-baby behavior. The pandemic has been made worse because some Americans reveled in refusing to do the bare minimum. I don't think anybody should feel like a winner after the past two years, but there's a whole lot of "told you so" coming from the titty-baby crowd.
So let's say you have the opportunity to ask Ken Paxton a question. What question do you ask him? A relative's boss has given my relative the chance to go to some event of his. I doubt the relative will say anything too provocative (the boss has tickets because he's a donor, and I don't see my relative wanting to cause a problem), but they did ask me for my opinion. So far I have... "How do you sleep at night?" (But I realized the vile SOB probably sleeps better than anybody I know) "How are you going to beat Ted Cruz for biggest chode in Texas?" "What's it like constantly wasting taxpayer money on loser cases that only win you political points with the shittiest Texans?" "How did it feel standing with those wonderful Patriots as they fought against tyranny on January 6, 2021? You must feel so much pride from being in DC on that beautiful day! Speaking to the crowd, inspiring them moments before they stormed The Capitol to stop the steal?" Other ideas?
Sid Miller with a brief moment of clarity? Note I know thre stimulation is just going it to fuck with us. https://www.texastribune.org/2022/04/12/sid-miller-greg-abbott-border-inspections/
I am trying to figure out the point that everyone is trying to make. Yang seems like a decent enough guy. John Legend seems like a decent enough guy. I'm needing some context for Yang's initial tweet so I can understand Legend's apparent clapback. Twitter is a shit medium for context.
Can you imagine being part of his team? Trying so desperately to hide his stupidity. To give it some kind of veneer of folksy wisdom, or "plain old common sense", but knowing you can't even let him debate because he's dumb as a bucket of piss. A politician can't debate because he's too fucking stupid.
You're mistaking being president when these things happened for being the mastermind behind those things. He was the face (I did say communicating was his strength), but he was never the brains. That goes for the good things and the bad... except the grifting. Adjusting for inflation, when it comes to grifting, he may have had Trump beat