What I keep saying. But they don't ask me.

 

I am a history teacher. This is right up my alley. One of my specialties is the American Civil War. I actually had this conversation with a colleague in Texas. She learned a lot that day- not just for me, but from experts such as Shelby Foote.

I wonder in the Texas version of US History :

 

Did the the South win the civil war?

 

Did the US win the Vietnam war?

 

Is the Presidency of George W. Bush considered a success?

Are you saying this should be in a history book?

 

I suppose it's as good a place as any. It's a bigger part of history than slavery.

I suppose it's as good a place as any. It's a bigger part of history than slavery.

 

In US History? Though even most non-Christians admit that Jesus was an actual historical figure, how would his life be part of US History?

In US History? Though even most non-Christians admit that Jesus was an actual historical figure, how would his life be part of US History?

 

Didn't read the US history part

Didn't read the US history part

 

Neither did Texas.

I looked on their current page. I also looked for a search feature on their site. Couldn't find one. You're also welcome.

 

Why would they cover it again when it's old news? Nothing has changed, just looks like the LA Times is way behind the times, like 7 months. Must have needed a filler.

Why would they cover it again when it's old news? Nothing has changed, just looks like the LA Times is way behind the times, like 7 months. Must have needed a filler.

 

To me, it's important given the recent Confederate/battle flag debate. We have many people that are claiming "heritage" with the flag that don't know it's connection to the Jim Crow era. Heck, I didn't know that the flag hadn't been continuously flown at the SC Capitol since the Civil War, but came out as a result of desegregation.

If we continue to NOT teach our children (which we don't do about a lot of subjects that make us look less than perfect) of course they won't know history.

To me, it's important given the recent Confederate/battle flag debate. We have many people that are claiming "heritage" with the flag that don't know it's connection to the Jim Crow era. Heck, I didn't know that the flag hadn't been continuously flown at the SC Capitol since the Civil War, but came out as a result of desegregation.

 

If we continue to NOT teach our children (which we don't do about a lot of subjects that make us look less than perfect) of course they won't know history.

 

"Those who cannot learn from history..."

To me, it's important given the recent Confederate/battle flag debate. We have many people that are claiming "heritage" with the flag that don't know it's connection to the Jim Crow era. Heck, I didn't know that the flag hadn't been continuously flown at the SC Capitol since the Civil War, but came out as a result of desegregation.

If we continue to NOT teach our children (which we don't do about a lot of subjects that make us look less than perfect) of course they won't know history.

 

You mean the Confederate Flag that wasn't the confederate flag?

 

I don't necessarily disagree with you but schools and textbooks have been slanting history for years, both in liberal and conservative viewpoints. One good thing about the internet is the chance to learn real history, at least if you do enough digging. It's not a big news story unless it's the other guy slanting the books; and it's not going to stop.

You mean the Confederate Flag that wasn't the confederate flag?

 

I don't necessarily disagree with you but schools and textbooks have been slanting history for years, both in liberal and conservative viewpoints. One good thing about the internet is the chance to learn real history, at least if you do enough digging. It's not a big news story unless it's the other guy slanting the books; and it's not going to stop.

 

Check my post. I called it the Confederate/battle flag. I also said that we don't teach true history on a lot of subjects.

 

This response was to your post defending why it wasn't on FoxNews, as it was "old news." With recent events, I would say that it is highly relevant.

Check my post. I called it the Confederate/battle flag. I also said that we don't teach true history on a lot of subjects.

 

This response was to your post defending why it wasn't on FoxNews, as it was "old news." With recent events, I would say that it is highly relevant.

 

I disagree, I don't think it's any more relevant than it has been for the past several months. Texas screwed up and should change their textbooks. That is no more relevant now than it was a month ago. There will always be events going on. People will use the events to push an agenda or call out others for not pushing their agenda. And they will use the opportunity to take shots at news organizations that don't feel their agenda carries the same importance.

I don't think sugar coating history is anything new. I remember as a child hearing about how well the American Indians and Pilgrims got along at Thanksgiving. Few chapters later, they were savages attacking "American" settlers. In reality, the settlers were invading their land.

 

 

 

I do think that the slavery issue was covered properly, if memory serves me.

History should be complete and factual, scars and all. How else are people supposed to learn from our country's mistakes?

I disagree, I don't think it's any more relevant than it has been for the past several months. Texas screwed up and should change their textbooks. That is no more relevant now than it was a month ago. There will always be events going on. People will use the events to push an agenda or call out others for not pushing their agenda. And they will use the opportunity to take shots at news organizations that don't feel their agenda carries the same importance.

What is the agenda here?

I should have been more specific. A federal government approved universal textbook.

 

Federal government has no business in local education.