Advertisement

Register for free to remove this ad

Originally Posted by Clak "I'll insult an entire nation of people to score political points at home." http://news.yahoo.com/gingrich-fuels...125812009.html

If Gingrich gets backlash from that it'll mean a huge amount of progress has been made. Remember when Helen Thomas got fired because she said Jews should get out of Israel? But people who say Palestinians should leave Gaza don't get punished at all?

Originally Posted by Clak So I'm watching last night's Daily Show, and this BS about "keeping the Christ in Christmas" is hilarious. Especially when they showed the clip about Congress staying in session on Christmas for decades after the founding of the nation.

http://www.politifact.com/rhode-isla...-met-most-chr/

That bit was actually not true.

Originally Posted by Spokker http://www.politifact.com/rhode-isla...-met-most-chr/ That bit was actually not true.

Yeah that part didn't make sense to me either.

It was on TV - it has to be true.

Originally Posted by Strell Diamonds aren't made out of blood, ya dummy!

I know this is an old post, but I just read it and I cracked the hell up at Strell's edit of the Huffington Post story about the crotchety bastard bitching about oil being shown unfavorably in movies.

Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess Kids already work on family farms, why is that a bad thing?

You're missing the point.

Wilmington Delaware is the inner city. I've had children come up to me, no older than 12, while I was working and beg me for a job. I've seen kids hustling to sell crack, no older than 18, with the work ethic, efficiency, and organization of a McDonalds during the lunch rush. I've worked in the food bank with 10,12, & 14 year-old kids and their parents (who themselves were on food assistance) help pick through and pack food boxes. We had a child at a local school who was part of the chorus. Has a beautiful voice and always attends practice. But was from such a poor family he couldn't afford shoes! The parents had to get together and buy shoes for him.

Newt's argument is that poor people are lazy. It's that simple. It's demagoguery at it's worst. That if we just get those kids to clean toilets at school we can solve poverty. Look, I'm not saying the sin of sloth isn't in the world. I can personally be a slothful son of a bitch at times. But Newt's argument I find, as a Republican and a Christian, personally insulting. And it's classic Newt.

First, there's no actual policy there. Is Newt going to create an inner city peace corp? How is he going to improve educational opportunity. How is he going to reduce crime that often forces parents to keep kids cooped up in their home. Secondly, it's designed to be a political trap. As soon as someone speaks up on how stupid an idea it is, Newt can say something like, "Well, obviously my opponent doesn't understand the value of hard work. Instilling a sense of work ethic and pride in a job well done will help the youth of America." Queue applause from crowd. I'm politiclaly savvy enough to see the trap.

How about we just put arts, phys ed, music and shop back in schools. Id rather kids go to school till 5 or 6 every day but the last 2-3 hours be something like that where they are still learning work ethic but also getting a well rounded education, then for them to become a cheap replacement to union janitors. Yes doing this would cost a little more money but that money is because we are educating our kids and creating jobs. Its a much better solution.

Originally Posted by MSI Magus How about we just put arts, phys ed, music and shop back in schools. Id rather kids go to school till 5 or 6 every day but the last 2-3 hours be something like that where they are still learning work ethic but also getting a well rounded education, then for them to become a cheap replacement to union janitors. Yes doing this would cost a little more money but that money is because we are educating our kids and creating jobs. Its a much better solution.

I don't think 9-10 hour school days and destroying unions is the answer. I can't remember if I had this conversation with you before, but janitors deserve a good living wage too. It's not an easy job and schools tend to be understaffed to begin with. How does eliminating the earning potential of a position that allows someone to have a home, raise a family, and send a couple of kids to college a good thing? They might not be a nominee for most important job in the world, but it's a pretty damn important job that is pretty necessary.

edit: Did anyone catch the debate last night? I heard it was EPIC. There's going to be another one on tues.

Originally Posted by Admiral Ackbar You're missing the point. Wilmington Delaware is the inner city. I've had children come up to me, no older than 12, while I was working and beg me for a job. I've seen kids hustling to sell crack, no older than 18, with the work ethic, efficiency, and organization of a McDonalds during the lunch rush. I've worked in the food bank with 10,12, & 14 year-old kids and their parents (who themselves were on food assistance) help pick through and pack food boxes. We had a child at a local school who was part of the chorus. Has a beautiful voice and always attends practice. But was from such a poor family he couldn't afford shoes! The parents had to get together and buy shoes for him. Newt's argument is that poor people are lazy. It's that simple. It's demagoguery at it's worst. That if we just get those kids to clean toilets at school we can solve poverty. Look, I'm not saying the sin of sloth isn't in the world. I can personally be a slothful son of a bitch at times. But Newt's argument I find, as a Republican and a Christian, personally insulting. And it's classic Newt. First, there's no actual policy there. Is Newt going to create an inner city peace corp? How is he going to improve educational opportunity. How is he going to reduce crime that often forces parents to keep kids cooped up in their home. Secondly, it's designed to be a political trap. As soon as someone speaks up on how stupid an idea it is, Newt can say something like, "Well, obviously my opponent doesn't understand the value of hard work. Instilling a sense of work ethic and pride in a job well done will help the youth of America." Queue applause from crowd. I'm politiclaly savvy enough to see the trap.

I don't disagree. That's what Newt does.

Interestingly enough, liberals won't find much to disagree with when it comes to Newt's approach to solving problems - he, even moreso than Romney or Santorum, believes in activist government. Some of his proposals may not mesh with liberal goals, but his belief in the role of government is not in question. He's the neocon's neocon, cut from the cloth of the original brood.

He'd also be a complete disaster abroad. Freaking Walrus Bolton as his Sec. of State? Puke.

You like clicking on me for raucous political commentary, don't you Squidward?

Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess I don't disagree. That's what Newt does. Interestingly enough, liberals won't find much to disagree with when it comes to Newt's approach to solving problems - he, even moreso than Romney or Santorum, believes in activist government. Some of his proposals may not mesh with liberal goals, but his belief in the role of government is not in question. He's the neocon's neocon, cut from the cloth of the original brood. He'd also be a complete disaster abroad. Freaking Walrus Bolton as his Sec. of State? Puke.

Oh man, John Bolton as Secretary of State would be the ultimate epic troll the world move.

Originally Posted by dohdough I don't think 9-10 hour school days and destroying unions is the answer. I can't remember if I had this conversation with you before, but janitors deserve a good living wage too. It's not an easy job and schools tend to be understaffed to begin with. How does eliminating the earning potential of a position that allows someone to have a home, raise a family, and send a couple of kids to college a good thing? They might not be a nominee for most important job in the world, but it's a pretty damn important job that is pretty necessary. edit: Did anyone catch the debate last night? I heard it was EPIC. There's going to be another one on tues.

I didnt say to destroy unions and if I did I didnt mean it. I was saying it would mean we DIDNT destory the unions. Gingrich is saying give these kids the jobs and it will destroy the "expensive union janitor positions". What I am saying is give those kids some needed extra classes and it will teach them more valuable skills, make them healthier and not only do those janitors keep their jobs but new ones are created for the various teachers.

Its sad how undervalued teachers are right now. Here in Ohio we have made so many ing cuts to education its a joke. I felt disgusted last night when I was talking to my waitress at Pizza Hut and she said she had a degree in childhood education but just couldn't find work as a teacher right now.

Originally Posted by Admiral Ackbar You're missing the point. Wilmington Delaware is the inner city. I've had children come up to me, no older than 12, while I was working and beg me for a job. I've seen kids hustling to sell crack, no older than 18, with the work ethic, efficiency, and organization of a McDonalds during the lunch rush. I've worked in the food bank with 10,12, & 14 year-old kids and their parents (who themselves were on food assistance) help pick through and pack food boxes. We had a child at a local school who was part of the chorus. Has a beautiful voice and always attends practice. But was from such a poor family he couldn't afford shoes! The parents had to get together and buy shoes for him. Newt's argument is that poor people are lazy. It's that simple. It's demagoguery at it's worst. That if we just get those kids to clean toilets at school we can solve poverty. Look, I'm not saying the sin of sloth isn't in the world. I can personally be a slothful son of a bitch at times. But Newt's argument I find, as a Republican and a Christian, personally insulting. And it's classic Newt. First, there's no actual policy there. Is Newt going to create an inner city peace corp? How is he going to improve educational opportunity. How is he going to reduce crime that often forces parents to keep kids cooped up in their home. Secondly, it's designed to be a political trap. As soon as someone speaks up on how stupid an idea it is, Newt can say something like, "Well, obviously my opponent doesn't understand the value of hard work. Instilling a sense of work ethic and pride in a job well done will help the youth of America." Queue applause from crowd. I'm politiclaly savvy enough to see the trap.

Alot of that post makes sense. Why are you Republican again?

Originally Posted by Feeding the Abscess I don't disagree. That's what Newt does. Interestingly enough, liberals won't find much to disagree with when it comes to Newt's approach to solving problems - he, even moreso than Romney or Santorum, believes in activist government. Some of his proposals may not mesh with liberal goals, but his belief in the role of government is not in question. He's the neocon's neocon, cut from the cloth of the original brood. He'd also be a complete disaster abroad. Freaking Walrus Bolton as his Sec. of State? Puke.

He takes his political stance form plato then?

Originally Posted by Spokker http://www.politifact.com/rhode-isla...-met-most-chr/ That bit was actually not true.

Thanks for this, I wanted to look this up to see if it was true.

Originally Posted by Spokker http://www.politifact.com/rhode-isla...-met-most-chr/ That bit was actually not true.

Wouldn't eb the first time someone has gotten bad information. However, that senate site proves little,and I can' reproduce whatever info they got from that other records site.

Originally Posted by IRHari If Gingrich gets backlash from that it'll mean a huge amount of progress has been made. Remember when Helen Thomas got fired because she said Jews should get out of Israel? But people who say Palestinians should leave Gaza don't get punished at all?

Of course not, the palestinians are evil invaders of the jewish homeland. It's perfectly fine to shit on them.

Originally Posted by MSI Magus How about we just put arts, phys ed, music and shop back in schools. Id rather kids go to school till 5 or 6 every day but the last 2-3 hours be something like that where they are still learning work ethic but also getting a well rounded education, then for them to become a cheap replacement to union janitors. Yes doing this would cost a little more money but that money is because we are educating our kids and creating jobs. Its a much better solution.

Agreed. Population-wide, it would be beneficial to have more practical classes available.

Overall, this problem is not just limited to high school. College education often leaves people with useless skills as well... we have deluded ourselves to think that it should be everyone's goal to go to college... when many people would be better served by just learning a trade. Unless someone is taking a major that teaches some practical skills (e.g., engineering) or is planning to take the next step and to go to professional or graduate school... a basic college education is not cost effective...

Originally Posted by BigT Agreed. Population-wide, it would be beneficial to have more practical classes available. Overall, this problem is not just limited to high school. College education often leaves people with useless skills as well... we have deluded ourselves to think that it should be everyone's goal to go to college... when many people would be better served by just learning a trade. Unless someone is taking a major that teaches some practical skills (e.g., engineering) or is planning to take the next step and to go to professional or graduate school... a basic college education is not cost effective...

The problem is that what you are describing is a pragmatic socialist attitude. Which will never fly with Americans.

Originally Posted by BigT Agreed. Population-wide, it would be beneficial to have more practical classes available. Overall, this problem is not just limited to high school. College education often leaves people with useless skills as well... we have deluded ourselves to think that it should be everyone's goal to go to college... when many people would be better served by just learning a trade. Unless someone is taking a major that teaches some practical skills (e.g., engineering) or is planning to take the next step and to go to professional or graduate school... a basic college education is not cost effective...

Question, where do you say this from? Personal experience, raw data, or just common sense?

Originally Posted by dohdough I don't think 9-10 hour school days and destroying unions is the answer. I can't remember if I had this conversation with you before, but janitors deserve a good living wage too. It's not an easy job and schools tend to be understaffed to begin with. How does eliminating the earning potential of a position that allows someone to have a home, raise a family, and send a couple of kids to college a good thing? They might not be a nominee for most important job in the world, but it's a pretty damn important job that is pretty necessary. edit: Did anyone catch the debate last night? I heard it was EPIC. There's going to be another one on tues.

Interestingly enough I was reading an article about the future of employment around the world. If current trends continue the way they are, janitor/blue collar jobs will be the last few "secure" jobs in the economy going forward.

Originally Posted by BigT Agreed. Population-wide, it would be beneficial to have more practical classes available. Overall, this problem is not just limited to high school. College education often leaves people with useless skills as well... we have deluded ourselves to think that it should be everyone's goal to go to college... when many people would be better served by just learning a trade. Unless someone is taking a major that teaches some practical skills (e.g., engineering) or is planning to take the next step and to go to professional or graduate school... a basic college education is not cost effective...

Sure, because the last thing we need are laypeople who can think critically. You don't think a well-rounded, college educated population is more desirable than highly trained, unquestioning serfs (the power elite's dream for America)?