1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Good Sense and Gun Control

cjrian Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 4:05 AM
Trying to protect everyone, or even every child from every contingency guarantees that no one will ever learn risk assessment and management. People learn (usually quickly) from bad events and learn to control potential negative outcomes. For example, I've taught my children not to initiate a fight, that no one is the "winner" and it's merely who loses the most. I've also taught them how to escape most confrontations. But sometimes, they've learned, yards scraps cannot always be avoided, so I've taught them how to end a fight with minimal damage to themselves. Trying to prevent the unpreventable is a fools game. Learning, from experience, to evaluate and adapt is an invaluable life skill
"Everyday Math" is a poor substitute for actual teaching of subject material I've had to upbraid the teachers in my boys' school, admonishing them to NOT detract from their efforts because the boys will NOT be subject to such a debased program. I much prefer "Singapore Math" which actually teaches elementary math in a coherent, permanent way
In response to:

Obama's Orwellian Inaugural Address

cjrian Wrote: Jan 23, 2013 2:41 AM
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.' 'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.' 'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
In response to:

Lies & Clever Myths

cjrian Wrote: Jan 19, 2013 7:26 AM
Mitt's loss came during the second and third debates when he didn't go in for the kill. He should have continued his first debate performance and absolutely shredded Obama, and not agreeing with BHO's positions (conceding the high ground)
In response to:

So What’s Wrong With Hate Speech Laws?

cjrian Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 2:00 AM
Hate speech, like "hate crimes", are a sham - a farcical attempt at thought control.Assuage some morons sensibilities by making speech a crime and the verbal matters more than the actual crime. A beatdown, or killing, ALWAYS involves hatred, whether against an individual, or their superficial characteristics; or a pathological lack of empathy. And the thought process is inconsequential, it's the the crime that is relevant.
The fiscal and the social are one and the same. One can NOTt be fiscally Conservative, but socially liberal. Social liberalism takes funds - the fiscal - to run. Further, social liberalism erodes the fiscal forever. When the indolent figure out that they can get away with doing nothing and still have their happy lifestyle, they do nothing. When the productive learn (the hard way), that extra efforts go unrewarded, they refuse to do more than the absolute minimum. And both take a toll on the financial well-being of the Country. Social liberalism is a downward trajectory ending in true equality - in the gutter
In response to:

Who's a Coward?

cjrian Wrote: Jan 18, 2013 1:39 AM
The people of the US are still Israel's friends, but the administration is not.Obama claims God-like insight into all problems of the world and then demonizes anyone who disagrees with his pronouncements. It never even dawns on our "Dear Leader" that it just may be HIM that is wrong - seriously wrong - and in Israel's case, mortally wrong.
In response to:

Liberalism Versus Blacks

cjrian Wrote: Jan 15, 2013 1:35 AM
When Liberal policies (antics) fail, they claim that it was insufficient, wrongly implemented, or sabotaged. It never occurs to them that their basic premise was incorrect. Affirmative action, for example, shortchanges those denied (jobs, school admisssion, etc), to put the unprepared into an environment the "beneficiaries" are likely to fail (at great expense to them), and shortchanges the funders/customers. But the claim is that given enough time (as if 40 years were insufficient) or a greater emphasis on AA, that AA WILL succeed. It never occurs to AA proponents that preparing the underprivileged to succeed withOUT AA would be more effective over the long haul.
impoverishing ones self so that another can live in perpetual dependence is not empathy, it is enslaving. And impoverishing others so that third Parties can debase themselves in dependence is as far from empathetic as one can get.
Since when is questioning the veracity of a purveyor of untruths considered "bullying"? What Rice espoused about Benghazi, at Obama's behest, was known AT THE TIME to be untrue. For a REAL example of bullying, reread Ted Kennedy's "Borking" diatribe.
1 - 10 Next