You have yet to establish your original claim (the Bailey). You have not shown CRT (the theory) being taught in K12.
You can claim that certain aspects are being practiced (the motte) and I probably wouldn’t disagree with you there. Examining the legal and racial aspects of brown v board or Plessy can be an outcome of CRT.
But you aren’t doing that. You are falling into the conservatives outrage complex that you say you aren’t a part of.
Give us the child for 8 years and it will be a Bolshevik forever.
Vladimir Lenin
My premise?
You made the claim… you back it up. You won’t back it up because it requires you to go back to your motte and change your original claim. So instead of showing that CRT is being taught in k12… you will show that a teacher wants to examine racism In the justice system… then scream “CRT!! See!”
What in God’s name are you talking about now?
“Make up something then vehemently argue for its existence”
-Sneaky
There’s a whole thread!
No, not certain aspects. All of it.
From Textbook
Where do you see legal in there?
Yes, your premise. There is no contradiction. Just praxis.
I didn’t make it up. Marx and Marcuse did.
Why do you deny a successful strateg… the backlash?
Your claim is CRT is being taught. Period.
You can change it now to… “practiced” but that was not your original claim.
The thread you link STILL is not showing your original claim.
Race, Racism and POWER.
Right out of The Textbook.
Page 3 of the Introduction. A. What is Critical Race Theory
Not a nice try. It is being taught. It is being practiced. It is being indoctrinated.
You © have been caught.
You didn’t read your image did you… 
“Legal reasoning”
“Constitutional law”
This is way to easy for me. You are flailing
Your denial doesn’t help your case.
You still have not established your original claim and yet you keep defending it
Of course I read it. I’ve read the whole thing. Twice.
You are trying to set CRT apart from Critical Theory, something none of them; not Bell, not Delegado, not Crenshaw, ever tried to do.
In fact, they do the opposite, they admit it.
Trying to make the vehicle into the road? Tsk, tsk.
Take credit for it. It’s working. They’ve got you believing your oppressed, imagine what Johnny believes.
I understand the fear.
I can do this all day long.
CRT was not first and it is not unique. One of the beauties of Critical Theory.
Critical Pedagogy… wonder what that means…
And yet you asked me where I see legal in The image you posted.
I’m not sure why this point is relevant to your argument. Seems like you are trying to gish gallop to something else. Turn your blinker on if you want to change lanes.
“My guy” why the hell are you referencing that paragraph? This is getting really bad.
You want me to be impressed that you (assuming that is your finger) have a CRT book that you haven’t read?
Do you see the “education things”? Bell drug CT into the legal field, not vice versa. At Marcuse’s direction.
I will give ypu the word “legal” appears once in that photo. Now when I post a photo with the words Marx and Marcuse, where we going to be?
I think you are quite sure
The finger bothers you?
I have read it. And a lot more. And you know it. I can smell the fear through the internet.
