 |
Right, a guy that was governor of Massachusetts, ran the Olympics successfully and made a fortune on his own - not his daddy's money - was born yesterday.He was more qualified to be president by the time he was the thirty than the current oaf has today.Quote:
Originally Posted by paraclete
It's come to this...
Maybe because they are threatening our rights and freedoms?Quote:
Majority Says the Federal Government Threatens Their Personal Rights
As Barack Obama begins his second term in office, trust in the federal government remains mired near a historic low, while frustration with government remains high. And for the first time, a majority of the public says that the federal government threatens their personal rights and freedoms.
Only 1,502 people were surveyed -- a random sample? -- because "just 16% [of Democrats in that sample] view it as a major threat." As for unhappiness with the government, "Views of Congress: Problem Lies with Members, Not the System."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
The most interesting point in your survey speech was that its more likely that conservatives view the government as a major threat than anyone.
Quote:
Roughly three-quarters (76%) of conservative Republicans say that the government threatens their personal rights, and most (54%) say the government poses a major threat, by far the highest percentage of any ideological group.
This isn't news, even in such a small sampling, but it does point to whomever is not in power, is the most dissatisfied.Quote:
Among moderate and liberal Republicans, 57% view the federal government as a threat to personal rights and freedoms and just 32% say it is a major threat. These opinions, like those among Democrats and independents, are little changed from March 2010.
You missed the part about this being a first time majority. It's not about your alleged hissy fits over being out of power, it's trying to force religious to violate their beliefs, the looming healthcare disaster, our second amendment rights, regulatory overreach, the imperial presidency...Quote:
Originally Posted by talaniman
Hello again, Steve:
Yeah, they're really pissed out there.Quote:
it's trying to force religious to violate their beliefs, the looming healthcare disaster, our second amendment rights, regulatory overreach, the imperial presidency...
Bwa, ha ha ha.
Excon
It's come to this...
What would Michelle say, doesn't she want the children to play? Let's just wrap them all up like Randy in A Christmas Story and be done with it.Quote:
The playground structure is brand new and a child’s dream: Soaring metal beams and a tantalizing spiderweb of climbing net. It sits outside Stratford Landing Elementary School, but all the students can do is stare at it from afar.
Behind the yellow caution tape fettering the apparatus is what parents describe as reams of bureaucratic red tape threatening the equipment, which was built with $35,000 from countless Parent Teacher Association silent auctions and bake sales.
Although parents worked with the Fairfax County Public Schools facilities department, purchased the equipment, hired a contractor and had the playground ready for recess, the school system suddenly deemed the play equipment too dangerous. Since Nov. 30 it has been off-limits, say parents.
Never mind that the same equipment is installed at more than 1,200 parks and schools across the country, including a public park in Fairfax County.
“We have $35,000 wrapped up in caution tape,” said Eleanor Whitaker, mother of second- and sixth-graders at Stratford Landing, in the Alexandria section of Fairfax County, near Mount Vernon.
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_Fwk4yX-xCX...-story-2-1.jpg
Michelle has nothing to do with this one: "While parents say the kids just want to have fun, officials say the school system wants to avoid potential lawsuits should a child be injured on the equipment."Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
I'm having a hard time finding the sampling there, could you point out to me exactly who is represented in that survey?Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
SMH...Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
"Although parents worked with the Fairfax County Public Schools facilities department..." How could the school system, knowing what they were doing not put a stop to it before the parents had all those bake sales and spent the money to do it?
"METHODOLOGY - This ABC News/Washington Post poll was conducted by landline and cell phone Jan. 23-27, 2013, among a random national sample of 1,022 adults. Results have a margin of sampling error of 3.5 points. The survey was produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates of New York, N.Y., with sampling, data collection and tabulation by SSRS/Social Science Research Solutions of Media, Pa." (Obama's Favorability Best Since '09 - Yahoo! News)Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
"Although parents worked with the Fairfax County Public Schools facilities department, purchased the equipment, hired a contractor and had the playground ready for recess, the school system suddenly deemed the play equipment too dangerous.Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
Stratford Landing’s principal did not return calls seeking comment. County school officials said the equipment doesn’t meet strict requirements." (from the same Post article)
According to the rest of the article you cite,
Quote:
In a written report, the inspector found that among other safety issues, parts of the structure were too tall. One part of the obstacle is 94 inches above the ground, 10 inches higher than the school system allows. The report said that deviating from the school system's playground protocols “places users at an increased life-safety risk” and that the Evos system could lead to head injuries and neck entrapment. “The equipment should be removed from the property,” according to the report.
Why is this a big deal? All they have to do is raise the ground 10 inches and it meets safety standards. Or put bean bags or foam matting under it. Bureaucrats!!Quote:
Tistadt said that historically, the school system is “pretty risk averse,” especially when student safety is concerned.
“This is a litigious society,” Tistadt said. “If someone gets hurt using this equipment, the PTAs aren't getting sued, we are. They seem to be emotionally invested into this apparatus and they think we are being overly bureaucratic and overly intractable and overly cautious, but they aren't the ones who would be in court and they don't have the same safety expertise as we do.”
That doesn't tell me the sample, i.e. how many Republicans/Democrats/Indies.Quote:
Originally Posted by Wondergirl
Hello again, Steve:
Look.. It's POLL.. WINGERS don't believe polls, unless they agree with the outcome... I understand. But, since we live in a center LEFT country, I'm sure MOST of the respondents were Democrats.
excon
It's real simple ex, it's curious that they didn't tell us who was sampled. I don't buy that center left crap either, we still hold one house and 30 governorships.Quote:
Originally Posted by excon
It's always for the children, right? Back in 2009 the LA Unified School District held a news conference replete with images of hungry children and begging for more money to help pay for student meals. Said they...
It turns out that LAUSD and other California schools were diverting lunch money to other areas, like lawn sprinklers to the tune of some $170 million. Nothing like the schools stealing the kids lunch money.Quote:
Los Angeles— Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD) Superintendent Ramon Cortines joined by State Superintendent of Public Instruction Jack O’Connell, Assembly Member Tom Torlakson, and other LAUSD officials announced today the District may run out of the money needed to feed hungry children. For many LAUSD students, the free and reduced priced breakfasts and lunches eaten at school are their only nutritious meals of the day.
“School children cannot learn when they are hungry,” said Superintendent Cortines. “We have several actions currently underway to drive costs down but, at some point, we could face impacts to the program itself. We may eventually be forced to replace fresh fruits and vegetables with less expensive frozen ones and offer fewer whole grain products although they are healthier than the alternative.”
So not only did the lamestream media have a really difficult time noting the hypocrisy of The Goracle selling his network to a bunch of big oil guys, they're so quick to jump on Sarah Palin they can't recognize parody. Suzi Parker of WaPo reported Palin was joining Al Jazeera because
"they reach millions of devoutly religious people."
OK, so how smart does one have to be to at least question Sarah Palin going to Al Jazeera?Quote:
Washington Post falls for hoax report that Sarah Palin will work for al-Jazeera
By: John Hayward
2/12/2013 11:10 AM
Suzi Parker at the Washington Post wrote on Tuesday morning, “The Sarah Palin Story is a cautionary tale about what can happen when politics and celebrity meet.”
There follow several hundred words of rambling non-news about how Palin is “trying to find ways to stay relevant while her 15 minutes faces into the political history books,” after parting ways with Fox News. Parker artfully juxtaposes some factoids about Palin’s popularity in Alaska, and unsupported speculation that she’s been ruined by exposure to reality TV, with an account of Palin’s attendance at the memorial for murdered Navy SEAL Chris Kyle – the implication being that Palin only attended the service to draw attention to herself.
But the marquee element of Parker’s post – the entire reason she wrote the silly, contemptuous piece – was the revelation that Palin would become a contributor for the TV network al-Jazeera bought from al-Gore. Supposedly Palin hoped to use her new perch at al-Jazeera to “reach millions of devoutly religious people.”
It’s a blockbuster revelation that turned out to be based entirely on a hoax… which Parker fell for hook, line, and sinker, apparently making no effort whatsoever to substantiate it, not even through the minimal practice of searching for a single corroborating source online. Parker’s sole source was an obvious parody site, the Daily Currant. She probably didn’t even bother to visit the site, instead building her story around a cut-and-paste of something she received via social media. At the time of this writing, the top story on the Daily Currant is “Catholic Church Considering Jerry Sandusky as Next Pope.”
Parker’s embarrassing piece now begins with one of the funniest “corrections” in journalistic history: “An earlier version of this post incorrectly reported that Sarah Palin planned to contribute to the Al Jazeera America news network.” The bogus material has been carefully clipped out, and the piece has been reworded to conceal how prominently it once figured in Parker’s writing, but here’s what it used to say:
Late last week Al Jazeera America announced the former vice-presidential candidate would be joining their news network.
“As you all know, I’m not a big fan of newspapers, journalists, news anchors and the liberal media in general,” Palin told the Web site The Daily Currant. “But I met with the folks at Al-Jazeera and they told me they reach millions of devoutly religious people who don’t watch CBS or CNN. That tells me they don’t have a liberal bias.”[
Hahahahahahahahhahaahhaha!!
You really don't want an answer to that question?Quote:
Originally Posted by speechlesstx
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:25 AM. |