1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Why Miley Cyrus Matters

Courtney37 Wrote: Oct 04, 2013 7:45 AM
Really? That's not what Billy Ray says. http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/earshot/billy-ray-cyrus-mileys-vma-633298 Remember, these people are all about publicity, and controversy brings publicity even if staged with family or so-called-friends. The fights that we see publicly are not even close to the whole story and therefore do not even begin to let us see the truth.
Obama supposedly taught the Constitution at Columbia.
Good points, but I completely disagree with your list of the three worst presidents in the last 100 years. If you are going to open the scope to 100 years, you should actually consider 100 years, which in this case would include Wilson (arguably the first socialist president, failed "League of Nations" plan gave birth to the United Nations, lack of backbone in dealing with France and Britain after World War I created the circumstances in Germany that eventually led to World War II). I'm not sure if I would put Wilson in second or first. Also, LBJ was attempting to reform the broken system every president since Truman had inherited from FDR. There would have been no War on Poverty if there had not first been a New Deal. The issue in Vietnam could not be helped, at least not from a political standpoint. You cannot fight a war without morale, and you cannot maintain morale if the home front refuses to support the troops if not the war itself. Unlike many other democrats in our history who have hated this country and felt the need to apologize to our enemies, LBJ was a proud American and a proud Texan, so in spite of my disagreement with him in politics and approach, I think he deserves enough credit for that to knock him down to sixth place or so rather than third.
Add to it that self-reliance is better for both the economy and the environment, and you might attract more swing votes.
Granted. However, if no politician faces re-election, power and popularity will no longer be a motivation once they get in office, and if they do not follow the platform they ran on, they can be recalled between elections. It would be nice if our elected officials were public servants who actually cared about society rather than attention seekers lining their own pockets.
I agree, and I would like to top it off with an even better solution: stop paying all of our elected officials so that they cannot continue to make politics a career by swapping offices.
Elephants do not need tents by nature. They are conditioned that way when society captures them and puts them in a circus.
No. The subject was 20 Observations About Human Nature That Liberals Would Probably Disagree With, not your paraphrase that left out a few key words, like "probably." The word "probably" implies there will be exceptions, but most of these statements are in conflict with the liberal platform. Meanwhile, Don did not actually change the subject. He merely opined that you do not always think like a liberal, in which case your belief does not support your point.
It is to each individual's advantage that everyone else act according to an established moral standard, but the only real advantage for an individual who chooses to follow that standard is that they have the privilege of being protected by it.
I disagree with all of you. Children act as they please with no enforcement, but if we were not born with a basic instinct of right and wrong, no human would have ever risen to the intellectual understanding that we need to pass our values to our children. It is natural for children to test the limits of right and wrong as they develop, for if they are not punished for bad and rewarded for good then there is no reason for them to care about what is right and wrong. All humans are naturally selfish and must choose not to be. Why would a selfish person choose not to be selfish if there is no personal advantage to do so?
1 - 10 Next