1 - 10 Next
In response to:

Racial Quota Punishment

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 18, 2014 3:45 PM
To be serious for a moment: If there was reason to believe that black students were being discriminated against, that they were being sent to detention or suspended or whatever punishment for the same offense that got a white student a stern warning, etc, than okay, I'd agree that there is a problem. But then surely the solution would be to demand that black students be judged by the same standard as white students. Not to say that once the number of black students penalized reaches a certain quota, that all black students must then be given free rein until the next quota period.
In response to:

Racial Quota Punishment

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 18, 2014 3:38 PM
Liberal leaders appear to be convinced that black people would rather be robbed, beaten, or killed by a black criminal than to see that criminal arrested by a white cop, or even by a black cop who is part of the "white system", because they value racial solidarity more than their own lives. Maybe it's true. I'm not black, maybe I just don't see the world the same way black people do. Or maybe liberal leaders don't see the world the same way the common people do. After all, if black criminals are allowed to run free and terrorize black neighborhoods, it's not the neighborhood of the president or the attorney general that they will terrorize. They have armed guards and iron gates. It's the poor and middle class blacks who suffer.
In response to:

The Dream of American Isolation

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 14, 2014 4:25 PM
How can you say that the U.S. and the U.N. don't take fast and effective action every time an innocent person is oppressed? Why, both are always quick to write sternly worded diplomatic messages and to isolate the defenders diplomatically. The U.N. sometimes even takes time out from condemning Israel to pass resolutions saying that maybe terrorists and tyrants should kill fewer innocent people. When terrorists in Nigeria kidnapped those school girls, the United States instantly raced into action with a full-scale Twitter campaign.
In response to:

The Dream of American Isolation

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 14, 2014 3:22 PM
Really? Would you say that Iran today is better off than it was when the Shah, our friend, was in power? Sure, the Shah and his government were far from perfect, but they were a whole lot better than what Iran has now. Would France really be better off if the U.S. had not intervened in World War 2 and had let the "people of Europe decide for themselves" who should rule there? Etc.
In response to:

How to Get Away With Sleazy Sex Scenes

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 14, 2014 3:13 PM
Exactly the same position liberals take about things they find offensive. If you don't like the name "Redskins", then don't go to their games, but don't publicly attack them over the name, certainly don't use government action to force them to change it. Or if you don't like a cross at a veteran's memorial in the middle of the desert, then don't drive hundreds of miles out of your way to go see it. No need to make a federal case over it. Or ... oh, wait ...
I'm reminded of a law suit I read about a few years ago where a man was charged with sexual harassment an lost his job because he sent an email to several co-workers repeating a mildly vulgar joke that he had heard on television the previous evening. One of the women was offended, and she got him fired. So ... tell a joke on television so that millions of people will hear it: no problem, freedom of speech, artistic freedom, etc. Tell exactly the same joke to a few co-workers: sexual harassment, grounds for firing and possible law suits. Our society is very confused.
So the solution for Republicans is ... let the Democrats have their way on national defense. Let them weaken the country to the point that terrorists can start blowing up our cities. The terrorists don't attack farms, they attack cities. Once the Democrats have succeeded in allowing terrorists to decimate our cities, they'll have no constituency left. :-)
In response to:

One Nation Under Godlessness

mjohansen Wrote: Nov 14, 2014 1:24 PM
Maybe we got here at least partly because any time a Christian tries to take a stand on an issue like this, you can count on all the leading Christian organizations in the country declaring, "We must obey the law" and "We must turn the other cheek" and so on and attacking the Christian for fighting back. Yes, Jesus said to love your enemies. He also said that if you don't have a sword, you should sell your coat and use the money to buy one.
I wouldn't buy a house JUST as an investment. But the question is not whether to buy a house or not buy a house. Unless you plan to live in a cardboard box under a bridge, the question is whether to buy a house or rent. Each has its advantages, but there are two clear advantages to buying: (a) You get a fixed payment. You don't have to worry about the rent going up every year. (Even if you have a variable rate mortgage, the interest rate may change, but the price you paid for the house won't. Its still more stable then rent.) (b) Eventually you will pay off the mortgage, after which you have zero housing expense. This will, of course, never happen if you rent. Yes, you still have to pay utilities and taxes, but you'd have to pay that in an apartment too, either directly or factored into the rent.
Wait, you're missing the big problems that low oil prices causes. One: It will encourage people to use more energy, thus increasing global warming and hastening the doomsday of all life on Earth. Two: It will create jobs, meaning that some number of people will no longer be dependent on government handouts, and they may then fail to vote for Democrats. And if the Democrats don't have the support of people on welfare, they are less likely to be able to cobble together a majority to push through gay rights, abortion, free contraception, and other vital social goals. Three: The general public are likely to be deluded into thinking that this means that free markets work, and it will undercut support for more regulation and government management of the economy.
1 - 10 Next