1 - 5
In response to:

Priebus Takes on Media Bias

Mike4367 Wrote: Aug 07, 2013 11:44 AM
Three observations: 1..Priebus needs to take a hard line when negotiating the debate format for 2016. Leftist ideologues need be kept off the panel. Where a commentator tilts decidedly left, he must insist on the presence of a conservative commentator on the panel for balance. Also the debate format needs to maximize the role of the candidates and minimize the role of the moderator(s), Direct interaction between the candidates should be emphasized including allowing the candidates to question eachother. A candidate who can't think on his or her feet and cannot handle that format has no business running for President. 2. Beltway Republicans think they are loved by the leftist media. They are naive. The love goes away as soon as the Democrat candidate is nominated. 3. The highest value among leftists is solidarity with other leftists. I am reminded of the famous quote from French Premier Leon Blum: "There are no enemies on the left!" He said that in defense of taking Communists into his coalition government.
In response to:

The GOP Isolationist Myth

Mike4367 Wrote: Aug 07, 2013 10:30 AM
Let me correct one misunderstanding about Henry Cabot Lodge and the League of Nations Treaty. Lodge's objection to the League of Nations Covenant centered on Article 10, which he believed would place U S Military forces at the disposal of the League. He and his followers in the Senate were prepared to support the treaty if a reservation were attached making it clear that U.S. military forces could not be deployed outside the United States without the consent of Congress, since the Constitution reserves to Congress the power to declare war. In 1919 there was an isolationist faction that opposed joining the League of nations under any circumstances. Supporters were divided between President Wilson's supporters who supported the treaty as written and Lodge's followers. When it appeared that Lodge might have the votes to attach his reservation about Article 10, Wilson instructed his supporters to vote against the treaty if Lodge's reservation was attached. Wilson suffered a stroke shortly after that, making any negotiations between him and Lodge impossible. That impasse effectively killed the treaty. Most history books, heavily influenced by Wilson devotees, don't tell you that.
The rating of a college or university would be the sum of its departmental point scores at each degree level. That would provide a clear indication of the value of a degree from a particular school. It would trigger a weeding out of boondoggle programs, since a weak program is as expensive to maintain as a strong one. The cost savings would be significant at many schools.
Free college education shouldn't be the goal, for the reasons articulated below. What students and parents need a way to know that they are getting value for their tuition and fees. I would like to see the college ratings systems in use by U.S. News and World Report and NewsWeek replaced by systems that score each department within each college or university. The departmental score would be based upon factors such as the number of students who complete batchelor's degrees within five years of initial enrollment, and the number of students who obtain employment in their field of study within six months of graduation or go on to earn advanced degrees in the same field.
The bottom line here is that nothing of value can be free unless everyone involved in producing the good or service worked for free. To keep those people viable, everyone supplying the goods and services they need would need to work for free. That would mean all of us would work for free. In that kind of system, everyone would be incented to do the minimum needed to get through each day.. It is reminiscent of the factory worker in the Soviet Union who told a Western reporter, "They pretend to pay us and we pretend to work." Seriously, the Pilgrims attempted to construct such a society. Half of them starved.
1 - 5