1 - 10 Next
"Not since the poilus surrendered to Hitler in 45 days has an opponent backed up so much talk with so little fight." So, not a big student of history?
This is standard politics. No politician I can remember ever outright admitted being wrong on anything ever. And I doubt the Pres cares much, it's not like he's running for anything.
Sounds like a good program, with plenty of peer involvement and good information. Now if only Rachel were willing to pay enough taxes to allow schools to teach economics and other life skills too.
When I hear him stand up and declare that science is valid and that evolution is part of that science, then I'll think better of him. I think this is Bobby unhitching his wagon from the tea party. But he'll have to do better than this.
In response to:

Who's Tracking Your Children?

hlloyd Wrote: Aug 10, 2013 2:32 PM
Than you for not being Ann Coulter.
Race relations aren't any worse, but the President has brought lots of closet bigots out into the open. In the end, I think it will turn out to be a good thing. Overall, racism will be reduced.
Suppose you and a few of your very rich friends took a look at the world and saw that there were two big problems. First was world population growth, and second was the rise of a middle class in many countries where no middle class had existed before. The combination of the two factors indicated a serious environmental catastrophe was about to happen. They pondered how to stop the impending disaster, and they came up with a simple plan. In essence, the plan was to destroy the middle class. Take away the social safety nets, render the public school systems ineffective, disenfranchise as many voters as possible, and make the tax structure regressive so that upward economic mobility is stifled.
Without a safety net, a financial crisis will quickly move a middle class citizen into the ranks of the poor. Without an effective public school system, citizens can't intelligently cast a ballot, and become vulnerable to propaganda and misinformation. A regressive tax system ensures that there is plenty of government money to support the activities the rich need, like defense and infrastrusture, while suppressing upward mobility. Suppressing citizen participation makes it easier to manipulate government. Why destroy the middle class? It's not anything personal, they just use up too many resources. The middle class want a life that is very much more expensive in terms of resources than the life of a poor person.
Suppose you and a few of your very rich firends took a look at the world and saw that there were two big problems. First was world population growth, and second was the rise of a middle class in many countries where no middle class had existed before. The combination of the two factors indicated a serious environmental catastrophe was about to happen. They pondered how to stop the inpending disaster, and they came up with a simple plan. In essence, the plan was to destroy the middle class. Take away the social safety nets, render the public school systems ineffective, disenfranchise as many voters as possible, and make the tax structure regressive so that upward economic mobility is stifled.
Suppose you and a few of your very rich firends took a look at the world and saw that there were two big problems. First was world population growth, and second was the rise of a middle class in many countries where no middle class had existed before. The combination of the two factors indicated a serious environmental catastrophe was about to happen. They pondered how to stop the inpending disaster, and they came up with a simple plan. In essence, the plan was to destroy the middle class. Take away the social safety nets, render the public school systems ineffective, disenfranchise as many voters as possible, and make the tax structure regressive so that upward economic mobility is stifled.
1 - 10 Next