Libs, you say Repubs/cons mistreat women, minorities and immigrants? Can't you win without lies? My U.S. representative?
' ...here in Fort Worth, Texas is a woman (Kay Granger) -- a Republican -- and has been reelected since 1997 BY Texas Republicans for 20 years, now. My lovely ex-wife (and still very close friend)'s State representative is an immigrant (Taiwan), a Republican and a woman and has served as a member of the Texas House of Representatives since 2009. She is the Hon. Angie Chen Button. Supporting her are tens of thousands of fellow immigrants residing in Plano, as well. Including my ex. Now, what were libs saying, again? .
Whenever I ask questions on politics, I get masses of answers from the USA, and not many from the UK, why?
We are much more complacent ... we are not that different .. they are much more right wing/fanatical but we are definitely catching up there.. ..and maybe the main reason is that there is no difference between Blair/Brown or Cameron... on the surface at least ... I think that there is a bit more difference between say Bush & Clinton or Kerry Stem cells and abortion for instance... Do you think that Blair/Brown and Cameron would disagree over those issues... ? They have more of a choice than we do ... we just don't realise it.... and think we do. dR bad small print: If you are not a fanatical american then that comment is not aimed at you ;-)
Is the biggest fear of libs is that people could escape their ideas and make the lib look foolish?
no their greatest fear is to be exposed for how racist and pathetic they truly are. To pull back the cover on their ideologies of hate and control. Remember, the national socialists were a 'leftwing' movement at its start.
What would be the pros and cons of legalizing dueling?
I agree w/ WC. The pros: -Culling of the herd who believe that possible death is an acceptable form of conflict resolution. -It would stop some innocent by-stander deaths in drive by shootings. After all, that's a form of dueling sans a formal agreement of date & time. -A permanent "anger management" solution. It only takes one session of "therapy." At least for one of the participants. I mean really, if someone's THAT angry, go for it. Otherwise, they're just another stalker whose looking to get you anyway. -Less of a tax burden with eliminated trials, appeals, prison health care & housing. -A boon for gun & ammo manufacturers, shooting instructors & target range memberships. -Possible weapon innovation creations. Cons: -What a sad result if wrongly blamed. -Less incentive to learn social coping skills. -"Thall shalt not kill." (It's there for a reason & I've gotta' trust the Author on that one.)
What is really at root of your belief system about politics? Is it true? Who gave it to you?
You have a great many misconceptions about Republicans. Look, here is the basic distinction: DEMOCRATS believe primarily in the virtue of Equality. They see government as the primary means of creating a more egalitarian society. REPUBLICANS believe primarily in the virtue of Liberty. They see government as the primary antagonist of individual freedoms. DEMOCRATS are more concerned with the "Collective." REPUBLICANS are more concerned with the "Individual." What you see as greed, Republicans see as the result of hard work, investment and future orientation. Republicans would argue that without the incentive of profit, people do not achieve and innovate. This is amply borne out by the fact that socialist states do not make innovative discoveries. An example of this is medicine. Yes, other advanced nations have socialized medicine. But over 95% of all new drug patents in the world are from American Pharmaceutical companies. Those on the left talk about the greed of American companies; but they always forget to mention that most of those greedy profits are plowed back into making new drugs and creating new jobs. If it weren't for those greedy pharmaceutical companies, a lot of European Socialists would be dead for want of the life saving medicines that their own controlled economies cannot produce. It's not greed to say that I've worked hard all of my life, and I'd like to keep more of what I've earned. It's not greed to recognize basic economic facts that innovation and progress go hand in hand with individual liberty. It's also not greed to recognize that governments aggregate power, and use that power to control people. Democrats will tell you that we need to be compassionate. But that misplaced compassion has done more harm than good. As the Democrat, Daniel Patrick Moynihan observed, one of the biggest traps the Democrats fell into was the belief that good intentions were enough to justify policies. His study of how Welfare in the 60s actually condemned people top poverty (Maximum Feasible Misunderstanding) is a classic. More evil has been perpetrated by those who meddle and justify their actions because they have the best intentions than anything else. In short, a "Soft Heart" does not go well if you have a "Soft Head."
Why is the left so strongly opposed to school choice?
Because “school choice” is a misnomer. Advocates of “school choice” want you to think that they care about you and your children. In reality, they only care about themselves.If you can “choose” your childrens’ school, then it is your responsibility to get your kids there. Why would there be buses when you can “choose” a school nearby or on your way to work?If you can “choose” your childrens’ school, then it is your responsibility to pay for it to run. Why would taxes do that? You wanted your kids to go there, why should others pay for staffing and supplies?If you can “choose” your childrens’ school, then it is your responsibility to make sure the curriculum isn’t a load of bunk. Why would there be educational standards when you can just “choose” another school if you don’t like the one your kid is going to?It’s underhanded and nefarious.Basically, the rich only want to pay for their kids to have good schools and screw the “great unwashed” (i.e. you and I). They learned long ago how to couch plutocratic policies in populist-sounding language to make the less-politically-literate (which is most folks) think they are supporting something that is common sense, when they are really shooting themselves in the foot.ALL schools should be fully funded, supplied, staffed, and maintained. All schools should have strong, expert-devised curriculums in a wide variety of subjects (not just STEM). It should not matter where you go to school, because a world-class education should be the birthright of every, single American child.That’s why I oppose “school choice”.