Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

The New Coffee Room

  1. TNCR
  2. General Discussion
  3. Taking On The Mouse

Taking On The Mouse

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved General Discussion
141 Posts 12 Posters 3.7k Views
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • JollyJ Offline
    JollyJ Offline
    Jolly
    wrote on last edited by
    #33

    Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

    If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

    Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
    • jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nycJ Offline
      jon-nyc
      wrote on last edited by jon-nyc
      #34

      Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

      I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

      Only non-witches get due process.

      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
      IvorythumperI JollyJ 2 Replies Last reply
      • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

        I guess we've discovered what it takes for Republicans to stand up to abuses by big business.

        Also, it's nice to see Jolly getting behind this kind of partisan governmental behaviour. For too long he's been critical of pretty much everything that governments have done to punish companies over partisan disagreements!

        IvorythumperI Offline
        IvorythumperI Offline
        Ivorythumper
        wrote on last edited by
        #35

        @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

        I guess we've discovered what it takes for Republicans to stand up to abuses by big business.

        It’s far more entertaining to watch the Democrats and the progressive Left lining up to defend raw capitalism and the rights of corporations to do what they want without government interference.

        Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
        • JollyJ Jolly

          @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

          There were a bunch of good reasons to end this over the years but neither DeSantis nor the legislature showed the slightest interest.

          Indeed DeSantis himself signed into law an even more blatant carve out for Disney in the social media regulation bill.

          It’s a shame people can’t zoom out a bit and realize we don’t want politicians to bestow benefits and punishments on corporations based on the degree of their political cooperation.

          Unfortunately, it just seems to have just whet their appetites for more such behavior.

          If it’s wrong when Democrats do it, surely it’s wrong when Republicans do it too.

          What's wrong is a corporation becoming political. Their job is to be apolitical as possible and return a profit to the shareholders by producing whatever widget they produce.

          Once a corporation decides to take a political stance, it operates in the world of politics, not business.

          You mean like refusing to provide cakes for gay weddings?

          Bad analogy.

          Is a single proprietorship the same as a corporation?

          IvorythumperI Offline
          IvorythumperI Offline
          Ivorythumper
          wrote on last edited by
          #36

          @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

          @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

          There were a bunch of good reasons to end this over the years but neither DeSantis nor the legislature showed the slightest interest.

          Indeed DeSantis himself signed into law an even more blatant carve out for Disney in the social media regulation bill.

          It’s a shame people can’t zoom out a bit and realize we don’t want politicians to bestow benefits and punishments on corporations based on the degree of their political cooperation.

          Unfortunately, it just seems to have just whet their appetites for more such behavior.

          If it’s wrong when Democrats do it, surely it’s wrong when Republicans do it too.

          What's wrong is a corporation becoming political. Their job is to be apolitical as possible and return a profit to the shareholders by producing whatever widget they produce.

          Once a corporation decides to take a political stance, it operates in the world of politics, not business.

          You mean like refusing to provide cakes for gay weddings?

          Bad analogy.

          Is a single proprietorship the same as a corporation?

          Even worse than your criticism of Phibe’s bad analogy.

          Deciding to not transact with a costumer in a nonessential service is not promoting a political view. It’s not a political matter at all.

          1 Reply Last reply
          • IvorythumperI Ivorythumper

            @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

            I guess we've discovered what it takes for Republicans to stand up to abuses by big business.

            It’s far more entertaining to watch the Democrats and the progressive Left lining up to defend raw capitalism and the rights of corporations to do what they want without government interference.

            Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor PhibesD Offline
            Doctor Phibes
            wrote on last edited by Doctor Phibes
            #37

            @Ivorythumper said in Taking On The Mouse:

            @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

            I guess we've discovered what it takes for Republicans to stand up to abuses by big business.

            It’s far more entertaining to watch the Democrats and the progressive Left lining up to defend raw capitalism and the rights of corporations to do what they want without government interference.

            If there's one thing that unites us all in these difficult times it's an appreciation of the value of double standards

            I was only joking

            1 Reply Last reply
            • JollyJ Jolly

              Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

              If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

              Doctor PhibesD Offline
              Doctor PhibesD Offline
              Doctor Phibes
              wrote on last edited by
              #38

              @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

              Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

              If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

              That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

              Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

              I was only joking

              JollyJ 1 Reply Last reply
              • AxtremusA Axtremus

                @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                Then tell companies to stay out of the political arena, unless it directly impacts their business.

                Keep talking like that and people might think that you want Citizens United v. the FEC overturned.

                IvorythumperI Offline
                IvorythumperI Offline
                Ivorythumper
                wrote on last edited by
                #39

                @Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:

                @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                Then tell companies to stay out of the political arena, unless it directly impacts their business.

                Keep talking like that and people might think that you want Citizens United v. the FEC overturned.

                Most conservatives I know think CUvFC was among the worst SCOTUS decisions since Dred Scott.

                CopperC 1 Reply Last reply
                • JollyJ Jolly

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  Don’t fool yourself into thinking that you’re operating on any principal other than tribalism.

                  Don't fool yourself into seeing everything through the lens of tribalism.

                  Pfffft. Had Disney been ginning up support for classroom prayer, we'd be hearing about big bad government sticking it to an honest business.

                  Are you in favor of sex education for your kindergartner?

                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua LetiferA Offline
                  Aqua Letifer
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #40

                  @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  @Aqua-Letifer said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                  Don’t fool yourself into thinking that you’re operating on any principal other than tribalism.

                  Don't fool yourself into seeing everything through the lens of tribalism.

                  Pfffft. Had Disney been ginning up support for classroom prayer, we'd be hearing about big bad government sticking it to an honest business.

                  Are you in favor of sex education for your kindergartner?

                  That entirely depends on what you mean by "sex education." Showing toddlers what fisting means, no. Suspending a kid in high school because he reported bullies beating him up because he's gay, no, I'm not in favor of that. The details mean everything here.

                  Please love yourself.

                  1 Reply Last reply
                  • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                    @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                    Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

                    If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

                    That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

                    Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

                    JollyJ Offline
                    JollyJ Offline
                    Jolly
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #41

                    @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

                    @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                    Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

                    If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

                    That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

                    Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

                    That's inherently wrong. Nobody is denying any individual the right to speak or to have his viewpoint heard. But I retain the right to tell anybody that they are a slobbering idiot to promote the teaching of sex education in public schools to small children.

                    “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                    Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                    Doctor PhibesD 1 Reply Last reply
                    • JollyJ Jolly

                      @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

                      @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                      Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

                      If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

                      That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

                      Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

                      That's inherently wrong. Nobody is denying any individual the right to speak or to have his viewpoint heard. But I retain the right to tell anybody that they are a slobbering idiot to promote the teaching of sex education in public schools to small children.

                      Doctor PhibesD Offline
                      Doctor PhibesD Offline
                      Doctor Phibes
                      wrote on last edited by Doctor Phibes
                      #42

                      @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                      @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

                      @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                      Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

                      If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

                      That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

                      Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

                      That's inherently wrong. Nobody is denying any individual the right to speak or to have his viewpoint heard. But I retain the right to tell anybody that they are a slobbering idiot to promote the teaching of sex education in public schools to small children.

                      I was making an analogy.

                      The government is punishing a company because they don't agree with their opinions.

                      Now, you can argue that this right should never have been given to Disney in the first place, but you shouldn't be defending a government punishing a company because it dares to disagree with the government.

                      And you wouldn't be doing so if the government was trying to implement a policy you didn't like and/or the company was promoting something you approved of.

                      I was only joking

                      CopperC 1 Reply Last reply
                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                        Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                        I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                        IvorythumperI Offline
                        IvorythumperI Offline
                        Ivorythumper
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #43

                        @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                        Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                        I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                        Which demonstrates the problem of CUvFEC. A corporation is not a moral agent or a real person, who is the primary political actor.

                        And actively promoting or sponsoring or lobbying for or underwriting clear political agenda is not merely a political “position” but a “political act”.

                        The State has both right and duty to frame laws toward the common good, and to punish actors who usurp the common weal or harm others. As a matter of prudence and jurisprudence, the State’s interests in public education trump the rights of corporations.

                        This is obviously a political matter properly (in the US per democratic republican processes) and corporations are organized and enfranchised to operate toward specific economic or common interest ends per their charter. For a State to punish a corporation for exceeding and violating its charter is not the same as “punishing private actors for their political positions”.

                        jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                        • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                          Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                          I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                          JollyJ Offline
                          JollyJ Offline
                          Jolly
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #44

                          @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                          Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                          I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                          Ron DeSantis didn't go pounding on the front door of Cinderella's Castle, demanding anything from Disney. Disney is the entity that injected itself into the public arena on this issue.

                          Consider Gay Days at Disneyworld...Disney doesn't make a big public deal about it, but they are well aware it is happening, as they increase their stock of rainbow-themed merch. OTOH, the state of Florida doesn't make a big deal about it, either. After all, it's a private transaction between a company and private citizens. There are people in Florida who don't like it and people who will plan their family vacations x'ing out those days for prospective visits, but nobody is saying that gays should be turned away or not be allowed the same interaction of any other type guests with the park or its amenities.

                          Disney made a conscious decision to wade off into this political pit of early childhood sex education. If they wish to play politics, fine. Politics ain't beanbag.

                          “Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”

                          Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton

                          jon-nycJ 1 Reply Last reply
                          • Doctor PhibesD Doctor Phibes

                            @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                            @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

                            @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                            Look, if y'all want to get your panties in a wad over denying public school districts in the state teaching k-3 children that sexual perversion is just hunky dory or sex education in the most general and innocuous terms is just hunky dory, that's a hill I'll gladly die on. That has no business being in the curriculum of that age child. Mouse House, or no.

                            If you are in favor of that, well...Says a lot more about you, than it does me.

                            That's the same kind of bogus emotional reasoning people on the left use to try and stop racists from having freedom of speech, and calling anybody who defends their right to speak a racist in turn.

                            Either you agree with freedom, or you don't. You can't just agree with people's freedom to do stuff that you approve of.

                            That's inherently wrong. Nobody is denying any individual the right to speak or to have his viewpoint heard. But I retain the right to tell anybody that they are a slobbering idiot to promote the teaching of sex education in public schools to small children.

                            I was making an analogy.

                            The government is punishing a company because they don't agree with their opinions.

                            Now, you can argue that this right should never have been given to Disney in the first place, but you shouldn't be defending a government punishing a company because it dares to disagree with the government.

                            And you wouldn't be doing so if the government was trying to implement a policy you didn't like and/or the company was promoting something you approved of.

                            CopperC Offline
                            CopperC Offline
                            Copper
                            wrote on last edited by Copper
                            #45

                            @Doctor-Phibes said in Taking On The Mouse:

                            The government is punishing a company because they don't agree with their opinions.

                            They are punishing them because Disney announced that the company is committed to overturning a law enacted by elected officials.

                            Disney is attacking the state and it's system of government.

                            The isn't just a simple disagreement over a simple opinion.

                            And on top of that Disney has decided to side with people who want to teach kindergarten students about sex, and not plain old normal sex.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            • IvorythumperI Ivorythumper

                              @Axtremus said in Taking On The Mouse:

                              @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                              Then tell companies to stay out of the political arena, unless it directly impacts their business.

                              Keep talking like that and people might think that you want Citizens United v. the FEC overturned.

                              Most conservatives I know think CUvFC was among the worst SCOTUS decisions since Dred Scott.

                              CopperC Offline
                              CopperC Offline
                              Copper
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #46

                              @Ivorythumper said in Taking On The Mouse:

                              the worst SCOTUS decisions since Dred Scott.

                              Good point

                              Let's not forget racism

                              1 Reply Last reply
                              • IvorythumperI Ivorythumper

                                @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                                I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                                Which demonstrates the problem of CUvFEC. A corporation is not a moral agent or a real person, who is the primary political actor.

                                And actively promoting or sponsoring or lobbying for or underwriting clear political agenda is not merely a political “position” but a “political act”.

                                The State has both right and duty to frame laws toward the common good, and to punish actors who usurp the common weal or harm others. As a matter of prudence and jurisprudence, the State’s interests in public education trump the rights of corporations.

                                This is obviously a political matter properly (in the US per democratic republican processes) and corporations are organized and enfranchised to operate toward specific economic or common interest ends per their charter. For a State to punish a corporation for exceeding and violating its charter is not the same as “punishing private actors for their political positions”.

                                jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nycJ Offline
                                jon-nyc
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #47

                                @Ivorythumper Lobbying and publicly supporting/opposing a bill is not exceeding any company’s charter. It happens literally every day in every state.

                                Only non-witches get due process.

                                • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                IvorythumperI 1 Reply Last reply
                                • JollyJ Jolly

                                  @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                  Thats not what we’re arguing about. We’re arguing about states punishing private actors for their political positions.

                                  I get that’s pretty indefensible, so you are pretending we are arguing about the bill. But we’re not. We actually agree with the intent of the bill.

                                  Ron DeSantis didn't go pounding on the front door of Cinderella's Castle, demanding anything from Disney. Disney is the entity that injected itself into the public arena on this issue.

                                  Consider Gay Days at Disneyworld...Disney doesn't make a big public deal about it, but they are well aware it is happening, as they increase their stock of rainbow-themed merch. OTOH, the state of Florida doesn't make a big deal about it, either. After all, it's a private transaction between a company and private citizens. There are people in Florida who don't like it and people who will plan their family vacations x'ing out those days for prospective visits, but nobody is saying that gays should be turned away or not be allowed the same interaction of any other type guests with the park or its amenities.

                                  Disney made a conscious decision to wade off into this political pit of early childhood sex education. If they wish to play politics, fine. Politics ain't beanbag.

                                  jon-nycJ Offline
                                  jon-nycJ Offline
                                  jon-nyc
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #48

                                  @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                  Ron DeSantis didn't go pounding on the front door of Cinderella's Castle, demanding anything from Disney. Disney is the entity that injected itself into the public arena on this issue.

                                  That’s true and entirely acceptable behavior.

                                  The government punishing it for having the wrong position on a bill is obscene.

                                  Only non-witches get due process.

                                  • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                  CopperC LuFins DadL JollyJ 3 Replies Last reply
                                  • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                    @Ivorythumper Lobbying and publicly supporting/opposing a bill is not exceeding any company’s charter. It happens literally every day in every state.

                                    IvorythumperI Offline
                                    IvorythumperI Offline
                                    Ivorythumper
                                    wrote on last edited by
                                    #49

                                    @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                    @Ivorythumper Lobbying and publicly supporting/opposing a bill is not exceeding any company’s charter. It happens literally every day in every state.

                                    Ermm…. Two obvious points:

                                    1. that it happens does not mean it exceeds the charter.

                                    2. a business corporation is organized for the functioning of the business.

                                    That’s the whole point of a business corporation— lobbying for the direct interests of the industry is one thing, lobbying to shape public policy to a political agenda is quite another.

                                    1 Reply Last reply
                                    • jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nycJ Offline
                                      jon-nyc
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #50

                                      The law makes no such distinction and anyway they would argue that the law makes it harder to recruit employees.

                                      But let’s not even pretend that DeSantis is doing this out of some novel theory of corporate chartership. It’s simply political retribution using the apparatus of the state.

                                      Only non-witches get due process.

                                      • Cotton Mather, Salem Massachusetts, 1692
                                      1 Reply Last reply
                                      • jon-nycJ jon-nyc

                                        @Jolly said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                        Ron DeSantis didn't go pounding on the front door of Cinderella's Castle, demanding anything from Disney. Disney is the entity that injected itself into the public arena on this issue.

                                        That’s true and entirely acceptable behavior.

                                        The government punishing it for having the wrong position on a bill is obscene.

                                        CopperC Offline
                                        CopperC Offline
                                        Copper
                                        wrote on last edited by Copper
                                        #51

                                        @jon-nyc said in Taking On The Mouse:

                                        That’s true and entirely acceptable behavior.

                                        Call me unacceptable, but I don't think Disney or the teachers should be encouraging kindergarten age boys to experiment with sex with each other.

                                        I understand that democrats consider this to be important training, they are entitled to this opinion.

                                        Disney is of course entitled to encourage kiddies to study deviant sex practices. This encouragement is the very foundation of our civilization.

                                        I just think they could maybe wait a while and maybe focus on teaching the alphabet and multiplication tables. I think some other parents agree with this opinion.

                                        1 Reply Last reply
                                        • George KG Offline
                                          George KG Offline
                                          George K
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #52

                                          Where on the spectrum of political outrage does this lie?

                                          Just curious.

                                          https://nodebb.the-new-coffee-room.club/topic/11763/sorry-ohio

                                          "Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08

                                          The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Users
                                          • Groups