XPost: alt.tv.the-view

�The View� host Sunny Hostin claimed on Thursday that President Donald Trump wanted to gut the Department of Education because his end goal was to foster the growth of a �permanent underclass� of uneducated laborers.

Hostin made the comments during Thursday�s broadcast of the ABC News midday talk show � even as Linda McMahon, Trump�s choice to serve as Secretary of Education, sat on Capitol Hill taking questions about how she planned to lead the department if confirmed.

Responding to Trump�s assertions that he would prefer to ultimately dismantle the federal Department of Education � turning the power over to the states � Hostin argued that he�d gotten the idea from Project 2025 despite his
repeated insistence that he�d never even read it.

�You know, getting rid of the Department of Education is actually the first goal listed in the education section of Project 2025 � We warned everybody,� she said. �She also argued that the Department of Education wouldn�t actually save very much money because it was small compared to other government agencies.

WATCH:

Sunny Hostin, an ABC News host, cooks up a conspiracy they that
"They" want to cut the Department of Education because they to
"create in the United States a permanent underclass, a permanent
cheap workforce, because educated workers cost more."
"That is the bottom-line and that� pic.twitter.com/OIelJ8IbI5

� Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) February 13, 2025

Hostin followed that with her claim that the real reason Trump planned to ax the department was to reduce the number of American children who are provided
a good education.

�It�s not really about saving money,� she said. �I think there�s a much more nefarious reason for it.�

�Which is?� cohost Joy Behar asked.

�I think it�s because they � without education, you get cheaper labor,�
Hostin insisted. �I think what they want to do is to create in the United States a permanent underclass, a permanent cheap workforce, because educated workers cost more. That is the bottom line and that is what they�re doing.�

McMahon addressed that point during her hearing, saying that she believed �
as she said Trump also did � that �the best education is closest to the
child.�

Linda McMahon: "I'm really all for the President's mission, which
is to return education to the states.

The best education is closest to the child."
pic.twitter.com/SacoBcC9T7

� Corey A. DeAngelis, school choice evangelist (@DeAngelisCorey)
February 13, 2025

--
Don't jump!

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 04:30:42 -0500, Ubiquitous <[email protected]>
wrote:

�The View� host Sunny Hostin claimed on Thursday that President Donald Trump >wanted to gut the Department of Education because his end goal was to foster >the growth of a �permanent underclass� of uneducated laborers.

Hostin made the comments during Thursday�s broadcast of the ABC News midday >talk show � even as Linda McMahon, Trump�s choice to serve as Secretary of >Education, sat on Capitol Hill taking questions about how she planned to lead >the department if confirmed.

Responding to Trump�s assertions that he would prefer to ultimately dismantle >the federal Department of Education � turning the power over to the states � >Hostin argued that he�d gotten the idea from Project 2025 despite his >repeated insistence that he�d never even read it.

�You know, getting rid of the Department of Education is actually the first >goal listed in the education section of Project 2025 � We warned everybody,� >she said. �She also argued that the Department of Education wouldn�t actually >save very much money because it was small compared to other government >agencies.

I'm probably going to be hammered for asking but what's the problem
with Washington getting out of areas of state jurisdiction and vice
versa?

In Canada federal $$$ go into all sorts of areas of provincial
jurisdiction (far more than I personally think suggests sane fiscal
management) but at least they keep their hands away from the controls
once the checks are cut. The catch of course is that there being 10
provinces vs 50 states, Canadian provinces tend to have more influence
than American states in Ottawa / Washington.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:

. . .

I'm probably going to be hammered for asking but what's the problem
with Washington getting out of areas of state jurisdiction and vice
versa?

Then turn down your next invitation to appear on The View.

In Canada federal $$$ go into all sorts of areas of provincial
jurisdiction (far more than I personally think suggests sane fiscal >management) but at least they keep their hands away from the controls
once the checks are cut. The catch of course is that there being 10
provinces vs 50 states, Canadian provinces tend to have more influence
than American states in Ottawa / Washington.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:43:28 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<[email protected]> wrote:

The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:

. . .

I'm probably going to be hammered for asking but what's the problem
with Washington getting out of areas of state jurisdiction and vice
versa?

Then turn down your next invitation to appear on The View.

Last time I watched The View it was for Elisabeth Hasselback who the
year before she was married (and took her husband's surname) she was a
big star on season 2 of Survivor. She was considered fairly
conservative which would make her downright Fascist by the standards
of today though I don't think she was any more conservative than my
very Catholic in-laws.

Given they're now up to season 46 or 47 (usually doing 2 seasons a
year) you can tell how long that's been.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On Mon, 24 Feb 2025 01:05:34 -0800, The Horny Goat <[email protected]>
wrote:

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 04:30:42 -0500, Ubiquitous <[email protected]>
wrote:

“The View” host Sunny Hostin claimed on Thursday that President Donald Trump
wanted to gut the Department of Education because his end goal was to foster >>the growth of a “permanent underclass” of uneducated laborers.

Hostin made the comments during Thursday’s broadcast of the ABC News midday >>talk show — even as Linda McMahon, Trump’s choice to serve as Secretary of
Education, sat on Capitol Hill taking questions about how she planned to lead >>the department if confirmed.

Responding to Trump’s assertions that he would prefer to ultimately dismantle
the federal Department of Education — turning the power over to the states —
Hostin argued that he’d gotten the idea from Project 2025 despite his >>repeated insistence that he’d never even read it.

“You know, getting rid of the Department of Education is actually the first >>goal listed in the education section of Project 2025 … We warned everybody,”
she said. “She also argued that the Department of Education wouldn’t actually
save very much money because it was small compared to other government >>agencies.

I'm probably going to be hammered for asking but what's the problem
with Washington getting out of areas of state jurisdiction and vice
versa?

The question I would ask is what is an area of state jurisdiction.
It's not unreasonable to argue that the US government, along with the
state and local governments have a vested interest in an educated
population. Especially given our modern civilization where technology
is becoming more prevalent.

In Canada federal $$$ go into all sorts of areas of provincial
jurisdiction (far more than I personally think suggests sane fiscal >management) but at least they keep their hands away from the controls
once the checks are cut. The catch of course is that there being 10
provinces vs 50 states, Canadian provinces tend to have more influence
than American states in Ottawa / Washington.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:

Mon, 24 Feb 2025 10:43:28 -0000 (UTC), Adam H. Kerman <[email protected]>:

The Horny Goat <[email protected]> wrote:

. . .

I'm probably going to be hammered for asking but what's the problem
with Washington getting out of areas of state jurisdiction and vice >>>versa?

Then turn down your next invitation to appear on The View.

Last time I watched The View it was for Elisabeth Hasselback who the
year before she was married (and took her husband's surname) she was a
big star on season 2 of Survivor. She was considered fairly
conservative which would make her downright Fascist by the standards
of today though I don't think she was any more conservative than my
very Catholic in-laws.

moviePigging the language isn't "standard". It's just trying to destroy communication and understanding. Some of us remember public school
history lessons so we know what the word means.

It's very Trumpian indeed to debate using insults versus your opponents.
It's so much easier than arguing from a position of knowledge.

Given they're now up to season 46 or 47 (usually doing 2 seasons a
year) you can tell how long that's been.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

shawn <[email protected]> wrote:

. . .

The question I would ask is what is an area of state jurisdiction.

One turns to Article I of the Constitution in which Congressional powers
are defined (the delegated powers of the Tenth Amendment), and the
powers reserved to the states (except for those prohibited to the
states), also in the Tenth Amendment. That would be all other power to
make domestic policy.

It's not unreasonable to argue that the US government, along with the
state and local governments have a vested interest in an educated
population. Especially given our modern civilization where technology
is becoming more prevalent.

You conflated a reasonableness argument with a federalism argument. You
have two questions.

btw, the most intrusive national policy was No Child Left Behind Act of
2001, which teachers universally hated with its massive paperwork and standardized testing burden, both of which took significant amount of
time away from educating children.

But by all means, if your objective is the care and feeding of
bureaucrats, then ever more intrusive federal authorizing legislation
is the way to go. There is little evidence that massive federal and
state spending in education raises test scores, or when there is
research into better ways to teach, it gets implemented.

The next Congressional school bill should be called the National Handwaiving Act of 2026.

You know what successfully educated more rural black kids in the South
than anything else? The "Rosenwald" schools, a dirt-cheap program
without supporting a massive bureaucracy.

. . .

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)