Previous 11 - 20 Next
After Gruber revealed that Democrats made Obamacare purposely opaque because Americans are "stupid", it's OK for Democrats to come out of the closet and declare their intellectual superiority and disdain for others. I'm sure Harf felt a great sense of relief by coming clean. Wonder who will be next?
In response to:

No Gatekeepers

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 18, 2015 7:37 PM
Not only is that intuitively and empirically true, but any government built of fallible men will, given time, become corrupt. Not necessarily money-under-the-table corrupt, but the interests of those men will eventually eclipse those of the governed. The only solution is to keep government so small that the corruption is of little consequence.
In response to:

No Gatekeepers

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 18, 2015 1:33 PM
And, many cities are outlawing Uber simply because the taxi cabs don't want the competition and can shout louder than the Uber people.
In response to:

No Gatekeepers

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 18, 2015 1:26 PM
I say we start by cutting all government employees in half.
In response to:

Aiming the Starter's Gun at the GOP

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 18, 2015 10:15 AM
Republicans have never fought the MSM with a compelling message and a proper PR campaign. MSNBC, NYT, WaPo, etc. have very small audiences; the rest of the media would report more or less factually if there were interesting facts to report.
You and me both. I think "true conservative" has come to mean someone who will not vote for a candidate without strong conservative economic beliefs and even stronger conservative social beliefs. I prefer the libertarians, who follow the Constitution's prescription for small government economically and mostly hands-off on issues of personal behavior.
In response to:

Damaging Admissions

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 17, 2015 8:50 PM
Two happy parties, education worth paying for, and no government help needed. Hard to improve on that; need more.
How do you define "true conservative"? Would a true conservative prioritize economic problems over social issues, or vice-versa?
In response to:

Damaging Admissions

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 17, 2015 6:07 PM
Students who cannot afford the costs of college should be able to make a deal with an employer in which the employer pays the costs in return for X years employment commitment from the student. Colleges would rush to prepare curricula that the employer actually found valuable.
In response to:

Damaging Admissions

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 17, 2015 2:23 PM
Perhaps today's parents should be blamed for their seeming disinterest in their kids' educations; on the other hand, we are into our second generation of Americans who rightly perceive that they have little say in where their child goes to school, or the conditions under which the school operates.
In response to:

Damaging Admissions

Stuart95 Wrote: Feb 17, 2015 1:35 PM
With full school choice, parents (!) can select their kids' schools. If they want a school that spends part of its budget on athletics, orchestra, vocational training, community service, Wiccan worship, or whatever, that is their choice.
Previous 11 - 20 Next