Previous 21 - 30 Next
In response to:

Did We Vote for War?

PoliticalHistorian Wrote: Nov 18, 2014 7:22 PM
A little straying from "originalism" and "strict construction" by Brother doc, aka Rich at (1:49 PM) who wrote: "we do reserve the right to judge what religion we permit in this country." Um. Check the "free exercise clause" of the 1st Amendment. Does it mention we reserve the right? Where, in the Constitution, does it say we reserve the right? Do we reserve the right to ban Buddhists? Catholics? Jews? I'm not talking about criminals or non-citizens. You said ... clearly ... "we reserve the right" ... where in the Constitution is that said? Thanks.
In response to:

A Legacy of Liberalism

PoliticalHistorian Wrote: Nov 18, 2014 6:31 PM
This is an engaging article and I would like to see Dr. Sowell follow up on a couple of points. #1 First, there is this passage. [Kristoff] "cites a study showing that 'counties in America that had a higher proportion of slaves in 1860 are still more unequal today.' Has he never heard statisticians' repeated warnings that correlation is not causation?" Dr. Sowell is correct on correlation-causation but the research referenced is more than simple correlation. It is carefully written, well-documented and uses appropriate methods and techniques. The article deserves more than a dismissive comment. #2 In this piece, Dr. Sowell notes "the cold fact is that the poverty rate among blacks fell from 87 percent in 1940 to 47 percent by 1960." I wonder what the poverty rates were pre-New Deal (if they were measured at all). I also wish that he would have offered an explanation for that significant decline from 1940 to 1960. Was it exclusively based upon migration northward by blacks? The conversion to a wartime economy that offered jobs? It was latter part in the FDR Era with Truman and Ike following. In Congress, Republicans had control in 1947-48 and 1953-54. Otherwise, it was a Dem Congress. What went right at that time? Just wonderin'. Good piece. Hoping for some follow up from the good Dr.
Here then is a key question. Why do blacks who have been successful -- good family, well educated, working at a good job -- persist in voting for Democrats?
More specifics. Someone below that a woman should never be superior to a man. Does that rule out -- I want YOUR opinion -- any woman who is hired in a supervisory position where those she supervises are men? Yes or no? Game on?
And next, I suggest ... if you want specifics ... compiling the Biblical quotes here. Do you agree with the "gist" of them that women should be submissive? I'm not talking feminists or hyper-feminists. Should a woman, contemplating marriage, understand she has to be submissive ... according to the "Biblical scholars" here? Yes or no? Your thoughts?
Want specifics? Let's start with the person who called women ... "broads" .... how's that? What if someone called a woman in your family a "broad" ... ok with you?
And the Biblical "scholarship" here is ... well ... interesting.
So .. enjoying watching folks traffic in stereotypes, name-calling, bitterness, and anger. It is funny. The same accusations Hawkins makes can be applied to a good number of the posts here. I find that amusing on this "football Saturday."
Tell we when there were not career politicians? Check it out. Madison? Hamilton? Both were patriots. You set up a false dichotomy. You can be a patriot and a career politician, no? Look at the Congress post WWII. A lot of members served their country in the 1941-1945 period and after that, served 10+ terms in Congress.
It is funny. When the Dems win big, they say "mandate" & Reps say "low information voters" and not a mandate. When the Reps win big, they say "mandate" & Dems say "mislead" voters and not a mandate. I love it. Interpretation of elections depends on your party & ideology. My interpretation: If things go well for the party in power, people vote their satisfaction. If things go poorly for the party in power, people vote their satisfaction. That simple. Look up Ike and the 1958 midterms, clobbered. As was Truman in 1946, LBJ in 1966, Nixon/Ford in 1974, Reagan in 1982, Clinton in 1994. Bush II in 2006 and Obama in 2010. There is a pattern there, especially when compared with 1934, 1962, 1998, and 2002. Good news, vote the party in power. Bad news, vote against.
No, Carlos. You dodged Mark's point. You pivoted like a politician. In your post, you indicted 90% of the clerics. Which ones? Better yet, which ones are in your category of 10%? Learned this earlier in my life. If you make a broad generalization, be prepared to defend. You did not. You rhetorically ran away (for a film reference, see Monty Python & the Holy Grail ... .scene at the castle with the deliberately obnoxious French .... ends in the call to "run away, run away").
Previous 21 - 30 Next