by Matthew Gault at Medium
"Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel recently declared the self-proclaimed Islamic State an imminent threat to America. British Prime Minister David Cameron raised the threat level in the United Kingdom, saying that an attack by IS terrorists was highly likely.
The threat’s seriousness is subject of a major debate both privately—among officials—and publicly at large. On the major cable networks, the pundits talk about Hagel and Cameron’s actions, wondering just how worried everyone should be.
But we’re often scared of the wrong things. Domestic terrorism is far scarier and a much greater threat than foreign terrorists. A recent Department of Homeland Security survey revealed that police officers consider sovereign citizens movements more threatening than jihadis.”
Dana Goldstein, author of The Teacher Wars: A History of America’s Most Embattled Profession, spoke to Fresh Air about how teachers have become both “resented and idealized” over 200 years of history.
In the interview Goldstein explains how teaching became a woman’s profession:
"A lot of people are surprised to learn that back in 1800, 90 percent of American teachers were actually male. Today we know that actually 76 percent of [them are] female, so how did this huge flip happen?
The answer is that as school reformers began to realize in the 1820s that schooling should be compulsory — that parents should be forced to send their kids to school, and public education should be universal — they had to come up with a way to do this basically in an affordable manner, because raising taxes was just about as unpopular back then as it is now. So what we see is this alliance between politicians and education reformers in the early 19th century to redefine teaching as a female profession.
They do this in a couple ways: First, they argue that women are more moral in a Christian sense than men. They depict men as alcoholic, intemperate, lash-wielding, horrible teachers who are abusive to children. They make this argument that women can do a better job because they’re more naturally suited to spend time with kids, on a biological level. Then they are also quite explicit about the fact that [they] can pay women about 50 percent as much — and this is going to be a great thing for the taxpayer.”
by Travis Gettys at Raw Story
"Team members carried yellow reference cards that listed about 15 professions - such as firefighters, nurses, doctors, military personnel, and police officers - with corresponding point values ranging from 500 to 2,000 points.
Police officers carried the highest point value.”
Why the fucking nurses?
"The volunteers, who carried no state-issued identification, carried cards that indicated they had a constitutional right to gather the information without any restrictions from local authorities."This is the part of the story that I find so fucking weird. If someone came to my door and, when I asked who they were or what they wanted, gave me a scripted defense of their “constitutional rights” I’d immediately know they were a right-wing lunatic because normal people just don’t do this shit. They don’t talk like that and they don’t have this delusional and inflated sense of entitlement to be protected from investigation by the government while trying to take down the government.
by Paul Rosenberg at Salon
"The continuing right-wing effort to make a hero out of Michael Brown’s killer, Darren Wilson, may not turn out so well, if the past is any guide. Remember Cliven Bundy? Donald Sterling? George Zimmerman?
Just because liberals don’t like someone doesn’t mean he should automatically be a hero to conservatives. There was a point when even the National Review seemed to recognize this — editor Rich Lowry once wrote a column titled “Al Sharpton Is Right,” about the need for charges to be filed against George Zimmerman, when Florida officials were dragging their heels.
But that time is long gone, apparently. And as a result, the right seems well on its way to aligning with the reemergence of a 21st century form of lynching, even while furiously insisting that they are totally post-racial. Cliven Bundy and Donald Sterling — the more readily and thoroughly renounced — didn’t kill anyone, of course. But Zimmerman and Wilson both did, and both, to varying degrees, acted under color of law, which is precisely how plain old-fashioned lynching used to work, in a shadow realm that would not have allowed the killing of whites (except, of course, for “race traitors” who allied with blacks).”