>


It would be more cost effective to print a poster with the list of books including a statement that the governor has banned them and they want to make sure no one brings them on campus.

Does the law actually prevent students from bringing the book in on their own?  I thought it only prevented publicly funded libraries from having it on their shelves.  I would think taking a book owned by the student would be a violation of the student's 1st amendment.  

It would be more cost effective to print a poster with the list of books 

I like the cost effectiveness of the poster, but the (fake) books would allow a public spectacle.  As in, the library builds the display as I described.  The fascists that want to enforce the ban come in and demand them removed.  The school can say "we've done nothing illegal and we're not removing our display".  Eventually state police are brought in and while the cameras are rolling (because the fascists want to show their victory) it is revealed that there was nothing illegal being done to begin with (because its just book jackets and not books).  Que the rightful outrage from parents and politicians about jackbooted thugs entering schools to remove books that aren't illegal.
One addition: throw a real copy of Fahrenheit 451 in there.  It will get reported in the news stories as the only real book, and how it is about government control of books.  Maybe all the "banned" books are actually real copies of Fahrenheit 451 instead.
They can just blame stuff like this on liberal socialists and the rubes who put them in office will eat it up all day long. >

"Don't touch my Medicare"  cost Denny Hastert ®  his job. We'll see >

I thought it was because he was a pedo >

Naw GOP that’s not an issue >

Probably loved a democrat. >

Republicans don’t give a fuck about poor people. >

Yet shitloads of poor people vote for them >

Shitloads of poor people don’t vote. Because neither party has any interest in enticing the almost 1/2 the country that doesn’t vote to do so. It would call for concrete action rather than lies from venal old pricks in both parties. >

I really don't think you can blame the parties. Maybe the Republicans who strive for gerrymandered districts so their minority can control the majority of voters. Maybe the Republican party, for the exhaustion it imposes on people - endlessly inciting it's base, be endlessly harassing it's enemies - I bet a lot of people just check out from American politics because they're just crazy, all day. 
But you have a duty to vote. Everyone does. Because checking out from politics leads to places like Russia, where folks are willingly ruled by a despot, simply because he deals with everything for them. >

I was doing some math on the voting population in Texas the other day and got super depressed: 29M people in Texas, 18M registered voters (don't know if I am buying that 11M people are too young to vote, but whatever), only 8M voted in the recent midterms. So that means that just over 4M people are making all of the governance decisions for 29M people. This is the problem. If the registered voters would ALL vote, most of our political problems would go away. >

This is why we need to make voting day a federal holiday. This is also why republicans try so hard to limit access to voting stations. 
With how important voting is and how it is everyone's civic duty, it should be a no-brainer to make it as easy as possible for as many people as possible. It doesn't even matter if it swings things one way or another. >

The people who depend on medicare the most voted for politicians who are going to destroy their lives >

Whenever I bring up this point with MAGA folk they literally just say “no they arnt” and like how do I even respond to that >

How do you convince a lizard to file its taxes early? Same exact way. The issue isn't the lizard, it's the person thinking the lizards are capable of understanding. >

Republicans love cutting the resources of their biggest demographics while pretending they're looking out for them. And their constituents are dumb and old enough to believe it. >

They live in a media bubble devoid of reality. They can contradict themselves in the same breath, or just leave out details. Fox News would totally say something like: “ThE GoVERnMENt is TaKiNg your MeDiCARE!” And conveniently forget the whole part where the Republicans are behind it. >

It’s already “Biden isn’t doing enough  for you to keep your Medicare. You’ll lose your Medicare under the Biden administration“ >

Froot loops who voted for those dipshits are clueless on how bad they, mom’n’dad & the grands are gonna be fucked if this goes thru. :( >

For sure😔 >

Tens of Millions of White Seniors that voted for Republicans, are fully prepared to blame Democrats. >

Death Panels.  Sarah was projecting this when Democrats took office in 2008.  She's just off by fifteen years and Party.  Newt Gingrich and Sarah Palin birthed MAGA. >

We already had death panels during COVID-19 because of Trump. >

We've always had them, they're called insurance companies. >

Underrated comment >

Tax the rich & f--k the GOP! >

Because I am on Reddit, not Twitter. >

Trump and the GOP were more than willing to kill off the elderly by denying a worldwide pandemic was occurring. They claimed it was just another strain of influenza and that people died from the flu all the time. Many on the right bought into this view even though people around them were dying. Even seniors that were most at risk denied that it was Covid-19 that was killing them as they lay dying in the hospital. All of this occurred because people worship Trump and his Pied Piper abilities to lead people to their death. >

Why does this matter when this bill will never pass the senate, and even if it did, Biden would veto it? >

It doesn't matter this year, with an existing budget. It will matter a lot next year, when the House is essential for ongoing budgets. >

GOP: we want to decrease government spending!
USA: okay, what do you want to cut?
GOP: No cuts! Only decreases. >

So... Newspeak? >

"Look, we're not banning or removing books by black authors. We're changing and streamlining the AP African American Studies course." - the Florida College Board
One of the recent examples of Republicans trying to redefine words. >

School librarian friend said they already got a visit from the book police. They didn't have to remove any books yet.
For the most part, I'm happy just to know kids are reading any books.
I'm not too concerned about what books, just that they are reading. >

I'd really love if school librarians set aside a shelf with bars over the top of it.  Inside the shelf would be book jackets (but not the actual books) of all the banned titles over unrelated non-banned books.  Since no actual banned books would be there, there would be no violation of their stupid law.  A sign near the bars would simply be a copy of the text of the state legislation banning them.
There's no more incentive to kids to do something than telling them they're not allowed to do it.  This way schools could very easily communicate what was banned and with just the text of the law there could be no accusation of politicization.  Librarians could simply say they are offering a lesson in civics and Florida law and letting the students know which books the state had chosen to ban. >

Retired teacher. You're on the right track. It would be more cost effective to print a poster with the list of books including a statement that the governor has banned them and they want to make sure no one brings them on campus. That would give the school protection ("We're just informing the kids of the new law.").
Of course, the curious kids will just google the list. Assuming at least a few have already. Back in the 70s there was a big fuss over "Are You There, God? It's Me, Margaret". A book about a pre-teen girl encountering periods and breast development. We were all desperate to read it because adults were so fearful of it's contents.