• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Did De Voss Lie to the Senate Hearing?

I was more concerned with the fact that her biggest accomplishments are inheriting money and marrying money. She is definitely not someone that should be in an important position.
 
Ah! Her foundation gave money to Focus on the Family and the Family Research Council. That's bound to get left wing hackles up.
 
I don't know. Some say she did. Pinnochio bigly. You tell me!

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/18/jeremy_scahill_did_education_nominee_betsy

She's not somebody I'd like near my kids' education.

They believe in a Christian supremacist theocracy that should govern the United States. And Trump was certainly not their first choice, but if you look at the kind of dominionist crowd that these guys run in, the very right-wing evangelicals, they now have come to peace with the idea that Trump is God’s chosen vehicle to deliver these policies. They’re very militant believers.


No follow up on that militant crack? Funny how they never do that. And her support for a strong family is something a lot of people want.

which the Southern Poverty Law Center has listed as a hate group.

That one means nothing. The SPLC is bought and paid for by globalists, progressives, and Islamists.

https://www.democracynow.org/2017/1/18/jeremy_scahill_did_education_nominee_betsy
 
she sounds like someone who wants to gut public schools just like they've been trying to do in my state for years. i don't support her nomination.
 
she sounds like someone who wants to gut public schools just like they've been trying to do in my state for years. i don't support her nomination.

Is it me or is every pick specifically hostile to the department they're supposed to run?
 
Is it me or is every pick specifically hostile to the department they're supposed to run?

at first appearance, mostly. we'll see how it turns out. i'll weigh in more when anyone has actually done anything.
 
she sounds like someone who wants to gut public schools just like they've been trying to do in my state for years. i don't support her nomination.

As soon as you get elected senator for your state that non-support will matter.
 
As soon as you get elected senator for your state that non-support will matter.

my parents dedicated their careers to public education, and my fiancée is currently doing so. i also went to public schools myself, and i received a great education. my informed opinion matters now.
 
Is it me or is every pick specifically hostile to the department they're supposed to run?

I see nothing wrong with that. These agencies are unlawful so putting up people to run them that are opposed to their existence is the right choice.
 
my parents dedicated their careers to public education, and my fiancée is currently doing so. i also went to public schools myself, and i received a great education. my informed opinion matters now.

Informed anything scare the hell out of trump supporters.
 
I see nothing wrong with that. These agencies are unlawful so putting up people to run them that are opposed to their existence is the right choice.

Unlawful? I don't recall a law against them.
 
Is it me or is every pick specifically hostile to the department they're supposed to run?

Not every pick, but you're not far off. Many of them, IMHO, are being put in place to reign in and shrink the departments they're being appointed to run. Some of that is okay with me. Some of it is not. The devil is in the details.
 
Last edited:
agreed, 100% needs to be kept as far away as possible...only reason she has even gotten this far is the money her family has donated to a multitude of republican fetishes

is "republican fetishes" the new code word from the radical left for "republican causes"
 
she sounds like someone who wants to gut public schools just like they've been trying to do in my state for years. i don't support her nomination.


we'd be better off if the Federal government wasn't involved in public schools in the first place
 
Unlawful? I don't recall a law against them.

I think he's talking about the tenth amendment-something that has been ignored ever since FDR was in office but if it was interpreted correctly, those departments would not have a lawful basis to exist
 
i disagree.

this board would be pretty lame if everyone agreed with me but the fact is, government interference into what are mainly local matters has only seen a decline in the standing of US education
 
Not every pick, but your not far off. Many of them, IMHO, are being put in place to reign in and shrink the departments they're being appointed to run. Some of that is okay with me. Some of it is not. The devil is in the details.

Reign in and shrink is a fine thing if you can demonstrate that that's going to be done in any meaningful, intelligent way. Saying global warming is fake when you're going to head up the EPA doesn't give me that comfort.
 
is "republican fetishes" the new code word from the radical left for "republican causes"

It's the new code word for, faith based. While the real perverted fetishes are the purview of the left. Just more lib projection.
 
my parents dedicated their careers to public education, and my fiancée is currently doing so. i also went to public schools myself, and i received a great education. my informed opinion matters now.

I went to public schools also, including one of the last FREE universities in America. My opinion matters to me just as yours matters to you. Our opinions not a wit when it comes to votes in the senate.
 
Back
Top Bottom