http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/08/class … nal-texts/
If the level of how the left wants to sift your child's mind does not frighten you, then you need to wake up.
If teaching kids to understand non-fiction, including government documents, is bad--I guess you would rather citizens be easy to bamboozle and confuse. 50% of the reading is still going to be fiction.
Yes, then I googled a mainstream news source and read more.
Please explain what you think I misunderstood about the acual underlying facts--not the spin.
Is it 1) the emphasis is being shifted lightly in favor of non-fiction or 2) a small number of the non-fiction sources recommended are governance documents and books about democracy.
I have no problem with non-fiction. I have a problem with programming.
Don't really care if you think that's a conspiracy thing or not.
If know a child who can be reprogrammed by reading a guide on house insulation, you need to get them some help.
You have yet to say where the reprogramming comes in.
Just kinda curious here. Why do we think our teens need to read guides on house insulation anyway?
How much of that do you think will really sink in?
You see I am one of those who never really fought against lots of these books because I value the power of imagination. Suddenly the people fighting for them want to remove them in favor of manuals?
The curriculum was changed because US children are falling way behind other nations in science. Including the ability to interpret tables and specifications. The point is to be able to draw facts from technical sources, not insulation per se,
But of course you know that, because you would never form a stong opinion without doing your research.
Now, where is the reprogramming?
Is it the other 1831 text by Tocqueville that describes early American democracy and praises it as the proper form of government for future nations? What part of that is bad?
Yep, this has been going on since the 1930's when the Carnegie Institute and Rockefeller Foundations began funding the NEA's policies and agenda. At that time it was to promote communism and eliminate God from the curriculum. My wife is a teacher and took a continuing ed class last year from a large, state university in our area. I believe her course was on curriculum development. In any event, the textbook was very focused upon social justice and featured Sol Alinsky principles. She showed me some of the passages. For the past 25 years or so, the foundations (Gates is a big one now, as you pointed out) have dumped billions into influencing school guidelines so that they now teach the kids that global warming is a fact, that socialism is good and capitalism bad, and little time is focused upon our founding fathers and constitution. Even history has been redone. For example, my youngest son, who just completed high school last year, was required to learn (read a book) about Japanese Americans interned in 'concentration' camps during WW II, and spent little time on the Pearl Harbor attack nor other aggression by Germany nor Japan in the conflict. Quiz 10 young adults between the ages of 18 and 25 on the three branches of U.S. government. I bet you only one or two will answer correctly.
Oh i know there are videos on YouTube where they have gone out and quizzed the youth.
They know about South Park and Jersey shore but little else.
I love how you put concentration camps in quotes.
These standards that you refer to as leftist, have been adopted by the National Governor's Association because the standards, according to the Common Core State Standards Initiative:
Are aligned with college and work expectations;
Are clear, understandable and consistent;
Include rigorous content and application of knowledge through high-order skills;
Build upon strengths and lessons of current state standards;
Are informed by other top performing countries, so that all students are prepared to succeed in our global economy and society; and
I have noticed that many of the links that you post to begin your forum threads come from The Daily Caller, owned and operated by Tucker Carlson, who received the first $3 million necessary to begin this endeavor, from Foster Friess, of "aspirin between the knees" fame. Suggest that you start reading additional, maybe more balanced sources.
Just my opinion, but you seem so frightened of nearly everything and everything you are frightened of is somehow turned into (in your mind) a "leftist conspiracy".
Yep....attack the messenger.
Thanks for identifying the problem there.
You have yet to identify a problem despite being asked many times.
Where is the reprogramming?
Maybe it is at the level of that site that you read that convinced you something was a leftist conspiracy when none of the texts being suggested support that interpretation at all. Maybe you have been trained to believe those sources and not look at the actual facts being reported and whether they really support that interpretation?
You are the messenger? Messenger of what? You read something and then put your own paranoid spin on it. Show me the indoctrination...
Good evening, Ms. Fae.
I read the article. Thanks for the link. There is nothing “left” about the reported initiative. I am awake and I am not frightened.
Apparently you are very frightened. I think it would be easier to address your fears if you would just tell us why you think this is a form of reprogramming.
I read the article as well, I think there is a marvelous opportunity to introduce non-fiction writing that is as beautiful, enlightening, informative and meaningful as fiction. Teach the "Federalist" or "The Histories" or "The Prince." Non-fiction does not mean dry factual recitation. What an opportunity? Perhaps introducing an executive order or two as a means of spurring a discussion on the limits and nature of power and civil authority would be possible.
One thing about teaching, it is limited by the imagination of the teacher.
Hello again, Ms. Fae.
I re-visited one of your earlier posts in this thread because I was bewildered by the reasoning that would lead one to conclude revising high school reading lists was a “left” leaning conspiracy. Then I remembered the Texas Republican Party's 2012 Platform, the one approved and adapted in Fort Worth on June 8, 2012. I was stunned to find on page 12, under "Educating our Children," that the Texas GOP attacks the teaching of critical thinking skills. "We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student's fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority."
What is that old adage about people who live in glass houses? Perhaps there are lessons in this thread from which we all can learn.
Hope you are having a great week.
Just dense today maybe, but I don't see the problem. Given that students NEED a math text, a biology text, an English text, a history text, a geography text and whatever else, it seems reasonable that their fiction reading be limited to 1/3 of the total number of books.
I guess if that fiction is limited to smallish books, it might not be enough but the examples in the link were not short stories.
I could even see "Executive Order 13423" being used as a text book. Learn what an executive order looks like, what it takes to produce one, what is legal and what's not. Part of a government class, maybe.
It's the source, they make anything sound like it's a leftist conspiracy.
The same people complaining are the same type of people who want Catcher in the Rye and To Kill a Mockingbird banned in schools.
You're probably right, though I don't see how providing a good education could be a leftist conspiracy. Maybe because it doesn't include God, or even "Godless" people. As spin means more to most people today than actual facts, I would guess that you are right.
I despise federal involvement in education and the left leaning teacher's unions. I also cannot stand the idea that The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Catcher in the Rye and To Kill a Mockingbird are expunged from school reading lists. There are left leaning organizations that routinely object to school reading lists, as well. I cannot imagine a lefty sitting still for students learning "Federalists" or 1984 - within the actual historical context in which they were written.
It is not "left leaning" people who usually get Catcher in the Rye banned or even To Kill a Mockingbird.
It is left leaning people who object to the Adventures of Huckleberry Finn and others. This I can verify. I wonder, when presented with the left right argument if the ideology of the book banners isn't something other than political conservatism. Prudishness knows no ideology. After all, Abraham Lincoln was a conservative and a vulgarian - much like myself - there, however, is where the comparison ends.
I am totally against any censorship and I have always spoken out about it, as have many of my fellow left-leaning people. It think it's ridiculous when a small minority (or often only one person) can get a book removed from a school. People who often complain about Huckleberry Finn don't understand the time in which the book was written or what Twain was trying to do.
It is small minded people who seek to censor, however, censorship has been greatest where government is most oppressive. Oppressive government is hardly a conservative idea.
I don't know, not allowing people to marry or decide what they want to do with their bodies is pretty oppressive.
I know, perhaps someday, when we reach paradise, Catholic priests will be compelled to marry homosexuals and Catholic hospitals compelled to perform abortions, as is only just in a truly enlightened, liberal ( or is that redundant) society.
I felt compelled to mention, the many charges of the homosexual variety that has befell the Catholic Church Preists over the past decade alone, lends them no higher morality to claim.
So only a classification of people who are perfect can offer any moral guidance? As a percentage of Catholic Priests, those involved in the sex scandal represent a smaller proportion than those in the general population who have committed the same offense. Isn't it interesting that we don't criticize Black Judges, Policemen, Prosecutors, Politicians for passing and enforcing laws despite the high percentage of crimes committed by Blacks. Isn't it simply wrong, in action and thinking, to disqualify an entire group for the abhorrent conduct of a few?
A good education would require the readings of Adam Smith as well as Karl Marx, the Bible as well the Koran. It should be a conglomeration of a vast number of different viewpoints.
As for history, it's funny how conservatives accept the state propagandized version of history that makes the United States the savior of the world. When this myth is challenged, all hell breaks loose, even if the facts are not on the side of the state propaganda spreader.
We did commit genocide on the Indians; we did/do treat women as inferior to men; and, we did own slaves. We also killed massive amounts of innocent civilians when we dropped the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I'm not sure how pointing this out is some sort of "leftist conspiracy." Maybe facts are more aligned with the left!
These people aren't conservative, they're reactionaries.
Well, Marx was an avowed Satanist, and that is proven in his writings subsequent to his graduating from high school. In fact, the main goal of communism itself was to wipe out Christianity. It's written in the Communist Manifesto. So, given that communism is a religion, and he was an admitted devil worshiper, does that exclude his works from schools because of the separation between church and education? Can't have it both ways...that would be hypocritical.
I guess non-intelligent responses need not apply.
Talking about Marx being a satanist is ridiculous. You are correct that Marx didn't like religion, but he didn't want to just wipe out Christianity. I also didn't say people should study Marx to be a Marxist.
Obviously, I don't want people to be Muslim or Christian, but I would still promote the study of their respective holy books.
Marx basically said religion, capitalism, government, etc would grow so large an hated they would die off.
Sort of. He thought there would be a proletariat revolution, and it had to be violent. This dictatorship of the proletariat would then "naturally wither away."
I think that part of his theory was wrong, because violence doesn't solve long-term problems, and he underestimated the trappings of power. As the psychologist Erich Fromm claimed, the character of man has to change before society can change. Forcing a radically different type of economic system on the capitalist character structure is inevitably doomed to failure.
My father came from Japan in 1905
He was 15 when he immigrated from Japan
He worked until he was able to buy respect and build a store
Let me tell you the story in the form of a dream,
I don't know why I have to tell it but I know what it means,
Close your eyes, just picture the scene,
As I paint it for you, it was World War II,
When this man named Kenji woke up,
Ken was not a soldier,
He was just a man with a family who owned a store in LA,
That day, he crawled out of bed like he always did,
Bacon and eggs with wife and kids,
He lived on the second floor of a little store he ran,
He moved to LA from Japan,
They called him 'Immigrant,'
In Japanese, he'd say he was called "Issei,"
That meant 'First Generation In The United States,'
When everybody was afraid of the Germans, afraid of the Japs,
But most of all afraid of a homeland attack,
And that morning when Ken went out on the doormat,
His world went black 'cause,
Right there; front page news,
Three weeks before 1942,
"Pearl Harbour's Been Bombed And The Japs Are Comin',"
Pictures of soldiers dyin' and runnin',
Ken knew what it would lead to,
Just like he guessed, the President said,
"The evil Japanese in our home country will be locked away,"
They gave Ken, a couple of days,
To get his whole life packed in two bags,
Just two bags, couldn't even pack his clothes,
Some folks didn't even have a suitcase, to pack anything in,
So two trash bags is all they gave them,
When the kids asked mom "Where are we goin'?"
Nobody even knew what to say to them,
Ken didn't wanna lie, he said "The US is lookin' for spies,
So we have to live in a place called Manzanar,
Where a lot of Japanese people are,"
Stop it don't look at the gunmen,
You don't wanna get the soldiers wonderin',
If you gonna run or not,
'Cause if you run then you might get shot,
Other than that try not to think about it,
Try not to worry 'bout it; bein' so crowded,
Someday we'll get out, someday, someday.
As soon as war broke out
The F.B.I. came and they just come to the house and
"You have to come"
"All the Japanese have to go"
They took Mr. Ni
People didn't understand
Why did they have to take him?
Because he's an innocent laborer
So now they're in a town with soldiers surroundin' them,
Every day, every night look down at them,
From watch towers up on the wall,
Ken couldn't really hate them at all;
They were just doin' their job and,
He wasn't gonna make any problems,
He had a little garden with vegetables and fruits that,
He gave to the troops in a basket his wife made,
But in the back of his mind, he wanted his families life saved,
Prisoners of war in their own damn country,
Time passed in the prison town,
He wondered if they would live it down, if and when they were free,
The only way out was joinin' the army,
And supposedly, some men went out for the army, signed on,
And ended up flyin' to Japan with a bomb,
That 15 kilotonne blast, put an end to the war pretty fast,
Two cities were blown to bits; the end of the war came quick,
Ken got out, big hopes of a normal life, with his kids and his wife,
But, when they got back to their home,
What they saw made them feel so alone,
These people had trashed every room,
Smashed in the windows and bashed in the doors,
Written on the walls and the floor,
"Japs not welcome anymore."
And Kenji dropped both of his bags at his sides and just stood outside,
He, looked at his wife without words to say,
She looked back at him wiping tears away,
And, said "Someday we'll be OK, someday,"
Now the names have been changed, but the story's true,
My family was locked up back in '42,
My family was there it was dark and damp,
And they called it an internment camp
When we first got back from camp... uh
It was... pretty... pretty bad
I, I remember my husband said
"Are we gonna stay 'til last?"
Then my husband died before they close the camp.
FORT MINOR lyrics are property and copyright of their owners.
I'm trying to look up some poetry written about the innocent Americans blown to bits, drowned encased within the Arizona's hull, or burned during the unprovoked Pearl Harbor attack. Additionally, I can't find any poems written by the British and American troops starved, bayoneted, experimented upon, disemboweled, tortured and forced into labor while malnourished from the Bataan Death March, and subsequent incarceration in the Japanese prison camps. Still looking though.
You missed that these people aren't Japanese, they are Americans, many citizens
AMERRRRIIICAAANS. WE PUT OUR OWN IN CAMPS.
Hey Sooner why do you think those two bombs were dropped?
And why do you think none have ever been used against civilization since?
And why do think there was a World War II anyway?
Read something interesting in a book the other day. WW II was started when one totalitarian country occupied Poland and it ended with a different one occupying the same nation. The U.S. and Britain stopped their advance towards Germany from the south (via Italy) so that Stalinist Russia had time to invade most of Eastern Europe and take it over after the war, and subjecting the occupants to 40+ years of communism. The Rockefellers, Warburgs and Bush family (the latter via Brown Brothers Harriman) made a ton of money financing the Nazis during the war. During the Cold War the global elite families, through their corporate interests, made hundreds of billions by selling arms and other resources, as well as loaning money, to countries on opposing sides. They made more as proxy wars were fought in Africa, Vietnam and Korea. Millions of innocent people died so their bank accounts could prosper. The main goal of a second world war was to form the United Nations. With one world governing body eventually the New World Order could fall into place. The preferred form of worldwide governing by the wealthy elites is actually communism, as it is a great way to control the population while concentrating all finances through a very select group of banks. That is why families like the Morgans, Schiffs, Warburgs, Rockefellers, etc. bankrolled the Bolshevik Revolutions (the first one failed) in Russia in 1916-18. They also financed Chairman Mao's rise to power in China. Look it up.
Do you think it's justified to kill innocent civilians? Would you like it if Iran bombed our population to try and "defeat us?"
You mean the innocent people that waged war on us?
It had to be taken to them.
Because we prevented them from importing oil and told them they were SOL. America in the 40s was like the kid that st in class shooting spitballs at people and claiming they hit them first when they took it to the playground.
Yeah cause regular japanese civilians waged war on us...
Our educational system is not especially impressive because the people running it and participating in it are not especially impressive.
Do you live behind the delusion that the impetus for all activity in our country is some thinly veiled battle between Republicans and Democracts, of which you must speak up as an important participant?
I don't buy into the fact that any kind of conspiracy is going on, but as a college student I will say that my grades certainly always depend on the degree with which my work is in alignment with the professor's opinions, which have almost exclusively been to the far left. It's not necessarily indoctrination, but I feel as if I should be able to disagree with them if I present an intelligent argument for my case. In one instance, I was asked to write a paper tearing down my personal beliefs that I am completely entitled to hold. I confronted the professor about this and he simply said "You can take a zero if you disagree with it." In another instance, the assignment called for a critical assessment of America's involvement in the Middle East. When the assignment was returned, the comments read "Clear argument, perfectly written, not what I wanted to hear- 75". I certainly don't think that there is any kind of indoctrination or reprogramming going on in American education systems, but it does seem unfair. If I want to hold an opinion different from that of the professors, am I not entitled to hold this opinion? Am I wrong for simply disagreeing? I believe in facts and hard evidence, but regarding matters that require an opinion, it would seem as if the left wing is being incredibly intolerant within the educational system.
I cannot believe that college professors are still giving out the same assignment that I was handed in 1972- mine was given by a college debate professor- Tear down your own personal beliefs, based on fact-- It was designed to teach us ( the current debate squad) how to effectively research and argue all points of view). I hated it at the time, but that and the other assignments he gave effectively turned me into one of the top debaters in the country. Today, I thank him for it... Clemson is a great university! I wish you well- Become an attorney- you will need to know how to effectively argue every side of the issue!
Thanks! This was actually a history professor though. I do purposely tear down my personal beliefs often (to make sure I still have sufficient evidence to maintain them) but this was an opinion paper on WW2, and he basically forced us to take his side under the threat of a zero. I definitely should have made that more clear in my original comment, sorry for the confusion! Even though instances such as this frequently occur, I agree that Clemson is a great school and I don't think I would be happy anywhere else.
Not sure, but it sounds like you felt you were coerced and that is what disturbed you. I can appreciate that.
I like what you wrote about your beliefs. In college, the paper I wrote that i was most proud of was one on Beckett wherein I meticulously proved the correctness of all of the ideas in his writing. Why was I so proud? Because Beckett's writing is the complete antithesis of what I personally believe. I needed to know that I could objectively look at something, see it for exactly what it was, allow the work to make its intended point and then continue on my way. I needed to know my beliefs could withstand my own questions.
But that experiment was completely voluntary, no one coerced me. I think I might have felt a bit indoctrinated if that weren't the case, but as it was, II was allowed to choose what I wanted to write about. I still remember the look on my Prof's face when I told him I was choosing Beckett. I think he was terrified that by the time I was done I'd have Godot not only arriving but performing stand-up comedy.
My views are also very different from Godot and Beckett, but like you I also greatly enjoy both of them. I think the most difficult stance I have ever had to defend would be that of Friedrich Nietzche, although that was also very interesting.
I have no problem analyzing or even defending views that stand in stark contradiction to my own, I simply don't feel as if my grade should depend on the degree with which I agree with my professors' opinions, which is certainly a form of moral coercion on their part.
Oh man Nietzche's writing is fantastic though!
The only time I encountered for bad grading due to an opposing viewpoint was when I wrote an essay detailing my loathing for MLA format. And when I re-wrote it with a different subject matter (As required/requested to receive a grade) I wrote it as poorly as I could and still received a higher grade than my initial paper.
TB Bulloch, while I have never personally experienced the situation you are describing, I do not doubt it has happened to you. I've had my own less than pleasant experiences (don't even mention that monkey/turquoise ring exchange in Merchant of Venice and my "misread." I'm still bitter. :-) ) I have a tendency toward holding academicians to a high standard and forget that while many are well-read, sometimes extensively published, and highly intelligent people, they are nonetheless, mere mortals like me and sooner or later one is going to do something disappointing just like those folks located outside the classroom.
Can someone help me understand how this is a leftist thing? I'm not being facetious or sarcastic--I seriously don't understand. Thanks!
I am at a loss, too- Keep trying to find out where the indoctrination idea comes in?
"We read literature because it is good for our souls," said Caity Doyle of Technapex, a provider of education technology news. That quote by Caity in the last paragraph sums up essence of this debate. It is about not allowing our youth to tune into their souls. I see it more and more as a substitute teacher. The young teachers are being indoctrinated in this manner and they do not rebell. Why? Cuz they want a job. At some point rebellion for the sake of maintaining our souls will come back into vogue. We who did so much of that in the past and are squelched today whenever we try it, will see it again. Im not sure when. I guess when we all get sick and tired of a cold, calculating regulated, lifeless technological society of automatons.
That is exactly what I took away from the article, but could not articulate--I didn't get a political message from it at all.
Even though I'm still lost on the left thing, your response helped me understand what I found disturbing in that piece. Thanks!
I don't see how this is a leftist deal. I think it would be good for kids to understand insulation and many other things that will be useful for them when they are finished with school. I will tell you a great, non fiction book all high school students should read, "Total Money Makeover", by Dave Ramsey. I bought it for both my daughters a couple years ago and I assure you, it is far from leftist.
Please note, I am not in any way, shape or form associated with the mentioned author nor am I trying to sell anything, I am just trying to make a point. The point is, kids should be taught useful things for later in life. Keep some classics but, make them read something that will help them in the real world.
What if they are not interested? Kids you say... how about girls. Teen girls generally have less interest in manuals and technical explanations. (This is why I advocate separate education for guys and girls. Guys have a different approach to life than girls. I feel so sorry for boys trying to sit in those stupid desks period after period trying to seem interested in English, Art, even Math... the way it is generally taught, as in: "I teach, You listen...or else!" This approach is easier for girls, I have observed. Also it is not fair for guys to have girls in their PE classes. I wish male coaches in the public schools would speak up on this issue.) Teen males are growing rapidly and they need to learn how to master their bodies. Perhaps martial arts, archery and fencing, should be added to the sports program! They need to develop a sense of self mastery and self control.
However, I think all students would benefit from a more hands-on concrete manipulation of all subjects. I agree we need to add more subjects that will contribute to real world capability, like animation and modern age technical skills such as computer repair, programming, graphic arts, etc. We need to get away from working for grades and start working toward excellence in craft, understanding of concepts and production of works. Literary projects could be based on writing newspaper articles, magazine articles, script writing, creative writing and expository writing. (HubPages for the youth would be great!) Education should be based on students' innate interests and desires and learning styles. (After all, there are learners who are visual and learners who are auditory.) The intrinsic motivation of each child should be observed, acknowledged, and respected. Some are interested in left brain activities, such as following directions and reading manuals. These people love math. Some are right brained in their orientation and must comprehend the whole before the detail. These people love Art and Creativity in all forms.
Both Reason (left brained) and Passion (right brained) must be introduced to all students. The balance should be aimed for... (But, each child has a natural orientation, just as each person is right or left handed. )
Maybe she did mean leaning to the left! (... just not politically!)
Good points. If school was the way you laid out, I may have actually been interested in going.
Total Money Makeover should be required reading - if financial literacy is the goal. The actual goal, however, is dependence on the government for our well being so that one is right out.
I can see both sides. Young people need to read good fiction to expand their worldview. However, young people (and adults) should know how to decipher technical documents not just for job training but to actually understand the language of contracts, legislation and regulations.
In any case, parents can always direct their children to read To Kill A Mockingbird and discuss the book over dinner.
And there you have it! Children should be expected to read much more than they are asked to read in schools- That is where parents come in! Buy your kids books instead of video games- Instill in your children a love of learning about everything!
My son, as a child, had a difficult time reading due to medical conditions, but I found out what he actually liked to read----The combination may baffle you-it did me. He loved comic books and Time Magazine! Believe me, those comic books and the annual subscriptions to Time magazine turned him into an excellent reader. At 34, he still loves his Time magazines---somewhere along the way, he lost interest in the comic books, but reads constantly. School had nothing to do with it-- I bought him books all the time and he read them.
If a parent has a paranoid fear of school curriculums, step up and be a parent! You are your child's ultimate guide!
Let me clarify a few points in regard to the original post. The Common Core State Standards are a set of standards that are currently adopted by 46 out of the 50 states. They are just that, a set of standards *not* a curriculum. If you are in the field of education or have read the new CCSS, then you know that the standards are a guideline for what is taught, not the specifics on how to teach it. It outlines what is and what is not expected of teachers and students. They do not state the specific titles of what will be taught, only that there will be a *balance* of both literature and non-fiction texts that will be read. No where does it state that students will be reading insulation manuals. The actual titles that will be read are determined by the local school districts.
The need for this standard has come about because of the lack of reading that many young people do in the area of non-fiction. Many young people do not have the analytical skills to read a piece of non-fiction text and gather the important content of that article (kind of like analyzing the source of a newspaper article!) If you are interested in reading exactly what the CCSS are what will now be expected of students, you can check out their website, http://www.corestandards.org/
I thank you, Cardelean, for your valuable contribution. Just like Barefootfae, I missed the part “new educational standards” and was hooked by the lie they “mandate that nonfiction books constitute at least 70 per cent of the texts high-school students read.”
I guess the real lesson for me is that this particular web site can not be taken literally. All facts must be fact checked for accuracy.
Thank you, again.
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.