1 - 10 Next
In response to:

The Common Core Conundrum

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 18, 2014 8:00 AM
"All of the arguments and problems with Common Core, however, pale in comparison with the biggest problem. It is a problem many of those who support Common Core cannot appreciate because they have no children or their children are old enough not to be affected." . Close. But the biggest problem is that the people pushing Common Core believe themselves to be smarter than they really are, and they definitely believe themselves to be smarter than the rest of us. They think they know what's best for our children - all children.
In response to:

The Common Core Conundrum

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 18, 2014 7:41 AM
Many people don't realize that the annual budget for the federal Dept. of Ed. is around $80 billion. That's about $250 per man, woman, and child - $1000 for a family of four - and the Department of Education does not educate a single soul. I agree completely with Darral that a thorough reading of the Constitution and all of its amenments would find no place whatsoever for the federal government to be in the education business.
In response to:

The Common Core Conundrum

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 18, 2014 7:33 AM
I disagree with the general conclusion that "it is not a bad idea to have some uniformity of education in a mobile society." Why create uniformity for everyone when such a small percentage of our society are mobile? It is completely impossible to have uniformity and excellence at the same time.
Y'all need to read Ludwig von Mises' "Bureaucracy". It is a 100-page book that explains the true nature of bureaucracies, which is simply to follow rules. For the BLM, the rule book says the guy has to pay grazing fees and since he isn't paying the fees the BLM bureaucrats will take all necessary actions to make him pay. No thinking involved. Rules are rules.
How high are these grazing fees? How long have the feds been charging them? In fact, why does the federal government even charge grazing fees on land that is otherwise useless? How is the federal government (i.e., we the people) harmed in any way by cattle grazing this land? Are the bureaucrats just upset that this rancher is getting to use the land for free?
In response to:

Holder's Race Card

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 16, 2014 8:01 AM
It was Brit Hume who made the sword and shield comment.
In response to:

Statistical Frauds

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 15, 2014 8:05 AM
As they say in Ohio, vote early, vote often.
In response to:

A Government Admission of Wrongdoing

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 10, 2014 8:19 AM
The point about Roger Clemens is the strongest. He lied about his personal use of drugs that improved his performance on the baseball field. Clapper lied to the United States Congress about unconstitutional conduct of the United States Government. Clemens gets prosecuted while nothing happens to Clapper. . That is just unbelievable.
In response to:

The Rise of American Totalitarianism

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 09, 2014 8:46 AM
r27cj, As the youngsters would say these days: "LOL!" I have that discussion with myself on occasion as well.
In response to:

How to Assist Evil

RichardsKY Wrote: Apr 09, 2014 8:12 AM
On the phone records part of this, I contend that phone records without a starting point might as well be an enormous database of random numbers. You can certainly identify clumps of people who call each other on a regular basis, but nothing beyond that. You have to have a starting point - a phone number "known" to belong to a terrorist. Only then do you have useful information. And if you have the phone number of the terrorist and presumably enough information to support reasonable suspicion, then you can handle this through standard 4th amendment processes. Otherwise, the government is simply on a phishing expedition.
1 - 10 Next