 |
|
| Browse | Ask | Answer | Search | Join/Login |
|
|
||||
|
I think it is more like this:
On the day you or I achieve a stable condition of equilibrium, those around us who have been less fortunate will draw one of two conclusions. Either that we are dead or that we have slipped into a state of clinically diagnosable delusion. And to live in delusion is to live in the comfort of ideology John Ralston Saul |
||||
|
||||
|
The Gospel According to Apostle Barack: In Search of a More Perfect Political Union as "Heaven Here on Earth"
"Yes, Barack had worked tirelessly on behalf of the American people, especially those who elected him in 2008. His followers needed to re-elect him to a second term, so that he could continue to accomplish the promises he made, thus, realizing his vision of America as a more perfect political union or “heaven here on earth.”
Then, as I began to contemplate ways to assist Barack in his 2012 re-election bid something miraculous happened. I felt God’s (His) Spirit beckoning me in my dreams at night. Listening, cautiously, I learned that Jesus walked the earth to create a more civilized society, Martin (Luther King) walked the earth to create a more justified society, but, Apostle Barack, the name he was called in my dreams, would walk the earth to create a more equalized society, for the middle class and working poor. Apostle Barack, the next young leader with a new cause, had been taken to the mountaintop and allowed to see over the other side. He had the answers to unlock the kingdom of “heaven here on earth” for his followers. The answers were repeated - over and over - in speeches Barack had made from his presidential announcement to his inaugural address. Those speeches or his teachings contained the answers to the middle class and working poor people living in a “heaven here on earth.” For when the answers were unlocked and enacted, Apostle Barack’s vision of America would be realized.
"About the Author - Barbara A. Thompson is a native of Tallahassee, Florida, with graduate degrees from Florida A&M University and Florida State University. She has been teaching for more than twenty-five years at the university level with experience in the areas of health, physical education and sport management. She is a professor at Florida A&M University, a former assistant vice president for academic affairs, past president of her university's chapter of United Faculty of Florida, a graduate of the National Education Association's Emerging Leader Academy and a two-time recipient of the Who's Who Among America's Teachers Award"
|
||||
|
||||
|
Amsterdam plans to relocate troublemakers to ‘scum villages’
In a move that sounds straight out of Orwell, Amsterdam allocated 1 million euros last week to a plan that would relocate trouble-making neighbors to camps on the outskirts of the city, the BBC reports.
The “scum villages,” as critics have called them, would lie in isolated areas and provide only basic services to their unwilling residents. According to details of the plan reported by Der Spiegel and the BBC, residents will live in “container homes,” under the watchful eye of social workers or police. The residents themselves might not make very good company. According to the BBC, they’ll include families that engage in repeated, small-scale harassment, like bullying gay neighbors or intimidating police witnesses. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again,
I looked for the thread where Steve posted a video about a liberal teacher doing something outrageous to a conservative kid. I clucked my tongue over that one. Anyway, I couldn't find it, so I'm going to post here. Democrats don't go to heaven. excon |
||||
Originally Posted by paraclete
|
||||
|
It depends. There was the Tinker v. Des Moines case in 1969 --
The principles of the Tinker case, which remain valid today, start with the premise that students are persons in and out of school, with fundamental rights. The Court stated that the classroom is a marketplace of ideas and depends on a robust exchange of ideas. Students and teachers don’t “shed their constitutional rights to freedom of speech or expression at the schoolhouse gate.” The Court stated firmly that free speech on campus is the basis of our national strength. “A subject should never be excluded from the classroom merely because it is controversial,” wrote the Court. But does this mean there are no limits–that you can say or do anything while at school? Where is the line drawn? The test is one of disturbance or disorder. As long as the act of expression doesn’t greatly disrupt classwork or school activities, or invade the rights of others, it’s acceptable. There’s no hard-and-fast rule that applies to every situation. Each case presents its own set of circumstances and must be dealt with accordingly. It was decided in Tinker that there was no evidence of disruption at school or interference with other students’ rights. (Juvenile Supreme Court Cases) |
||||
|
||||
|
It's come to this, a liberal NY Times columnist says conservatives have a point on the "safety net".
Profiting From a Child’s Illiteracy
By NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF THIS is what poverty sometimes looks like in America: parents here in Appalachian hill country pulling their children out of literacy classes. Moms and dads fear that if kids learn to read, they are less likely to qualify for a monthly check for having an intellectual disability. Many people in hillside mobile homes here are poor and desperate, and a $698 monthly check per child from the Supplemental Security Income program goes a long way — and those checks continue until the child turns 18. “The kids get taken out of the program because the parents are going to lose the check,” said Billie Oaks, who runs a literacy program here in Breathitt County, a poor part of Kentucky. “It’s heartbreaking.” This is painful for a liberal to admit, but conservatives have a point when they suggest that America’s safety net can sometimes entangle people in a soul-crushing dependency. Our poverty programs do rescue many people, but other times they backfire. Some young people here don’t join the military (a traditional escape route for poor, rural Americans) because it’s easier to rely on food stamps and disability payments. Antipoverty programs also discourage marriage: In a means-tested program like S.S.I. a woman raising a child may receive a bigger check if she refrains from marrying that hard-working guy she likes. Yet marriage is one of the best forces to blunt poverty. In married couple households only one child in 10 grows up in poverty, while almost half do in single-mother households. Most wrenching of all are the parents who think it’s best if a child stays illiterate, because then the family may be able to claim a disability check each month. “One of the ways you get on this program is having problems in school,” notes Richard V. Burkhauser, a Cornell University economist who co-wrote a book last year about these disability programs. “If you do better in school, you threaten the income of the parents. It’s a terrible incentive.” About four decades ago, most of the children S.S.I. covered had severe physical handicaps or mental retardation that made it difficult for parents to hold jobs — about 1 percent of all poor children. But now 55 percent of the disabilities it covers are fuzzier intellectual disabilities short of mental retardation, where the diagnosis is less clear-cut. More than 1.2 million children across America — a full 8 percent of all low-income children — are now enrolled in S.S.I. as disabled, at an annual cost of more than $9 billion. That is a burden on taxpayers, of course, but it can be even worse for children whose families have a huge stake in their failing in school. Those kids may never recover: a 2009 study found that nearly two-thirds of these children make the transition at age 18 into S.S.I. for the adult disabled. They may never hold a job in their entire lives and are condemned to a life of poverty on the dole — and that’s the outcome of a program intended to fight poverty. |
||||
|
||||
|
Hello again, Steve:
Yes, I do. Jobs would do that, but you guy's are BLOCKING Obama's jobs bill. I don't know how you don't know this, but working brings people out of poverty. The way to bring people out of dependency is NOT to cut 'em loose and make 'em fend for themselves... That would by YOUR solution... You believe they're NOT hungry - they're MOOCHERS. You believe they're NOT homeless - they're MOOCHERS. Romney let us in on the secret. excon |
||||
Not your question?
Ask your question
View similar questions
| Question Tools | Search this Question |
Add your answer here.
View more questions Search
|
