Jump to content

Fact Checking The New Socialist Darling!


Reagan

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, UT alum said:

 

They still have better overall health outcomes measured in term of infant mortality, obesity, diabetes, heart disease.

How can a Democrat be concerned with infant mortality?

By the way, I don't believe that statement for a moment...don't bother posting a study/poll on the Canadian healthcare system to back it up.

There are lots of bogus studies out there that show the wonders of socialism.

I can find just as many that blast it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How can a Democrat be concerned with infant mortality?

By the way, I don't believe that statement for a moment...don't bother posting a study/poll on the Canadian healthcare system to back it up.

There are lots of bogus studies out there that show the wonders of socialism.

I can find just as many that blast it.

I thought that if the baby died, everyone applauded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, UT alum said:

Constitution says promote the general welfare, not mine. Those are three areas that, when unchecked, can degrade the general welfare.

General welfare could be interpreted many ways.  But i don't think it means to rape me so someone else does not have to carry their load.  But since we are on the Constitution -- you might want to read the 10th Amendment.  It states exactly what the roll of the Federal government is.  And it says what is not stated here -- is left to the States. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

How can a Democrat be concerned with infant mortality?

By the way, I don't believe that statement for a moment...don't bother posting a study/poll on the Canadian healthcare system to back it up.

There are lots of bogus studies out there that show the wonders of socialism.

I can find just as many that blast it.

You ever look at the CIA world factbook? It has very interesting cencus data and social and economic overviews of every country in the world . It’s not a study. It’s a source of information people can use to form their own conclusions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, UT alum said:

You ever look at the CIA world factbook? It has very interesting cencus data and social and economic overviews of every country in the world . It’s not a study. It’s a source of information people can use to form their own conclusions.

As for the dig at Democrats about caring for infant mortality, I will be equally audacious. It looks to me that Republicans care more about a fetus on the womb than a baby after it’s born. I guess their success or failure is on them once they’re out in the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

As for the dig at Democrats about caring for infant mortality, I will be equally audacious. It looks to me that Republicans care more about a fetus on the womb than a baby after it’s born. I guess their success or failure is on them once they’re out in the world.

Why does it appear that repubs dont care abou babies after they are out in the world?  Is it because they want them to learn to be a self supporting productive citizen rather than teaching them to always be a victim?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, stevenash said:

Why does it appear that repubs dont care abou babies after they are out in the world?  Is it because they want them to learn to be a self supporting productive citizen rather than teaching them to always be a victim?

Pretty condescending, that. Access to healthcare, food stamps, equal access to public educaton, Head Start. Just a few programs that benefit children that Republicsns abhor.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Pretty condescending, that. Access to healthcare, food stamps, equal access to public educaton, Head Start. Just a few programs that benefit children that Republicsns abhor.

I was not aware that it has been so bad to be born in the United States in the last 200 years.  Why are so many people trying to get into this country if it is hazardous to children?  Is  terminating childrens lives before they are born ( and now, perhaps, just after they are born) considered equally beneficial as healthcare access, food stamps, and equal access to public education?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, stevenash said:

I was not aware that it has been so bad to be born in the United States in the last 200 years.  Why are so many people trying to get into this country if it is hazardous to children?  Is  terminating childrens lives before they are born ( and now, perhaps, just after they are born) considered equally beneficial as healthcare access, food stamps, and equal access to public education?

Look, this started with asking me three party platforms that are most important to me. I did not mention abortion among them. I’d appreciate you not throwing that card at me every time you feel the need to vilify liberals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Look, this started with asking me three party platforms that are most important to me. I did not mention abortion among them. I’d appreciate you not throwing that card at me every time you feel the need to vilify liberals.

So its ok to villify the great history of this country and to contend that the general welfare is not being properly addressed but not the contenders?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, stevenash said:

So its ok to villify the great history of this country and to contend that the general welfare is not being properly addressed but not the contenders?

Who’s vilifying our country’s history?  I like to think that both individually and collectively as a society we can always do better. Ever hear of continuous improvement?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, UT alum said:

Who’s vilifying our country’s history?  I like to think that both individually and collectively as a society we can always do better. Ever hear of continuous improvement?

Continuous improvement?  Such as a new law, new regulation, or new tax every time something out of sorts happens?  When are we going to ban sugar and fat in order to provide for the general welfare?  I don't know about you , but I CERTAINLY could have done without the govts ill fated "improvement" of the ability of the unqualified  to own homes.  It did exactly the opposite of what was intended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, UT alum said:

As for the dig at Democrats about caring for infant mortality, I will be equally audacious. It looks to me that Republicans care more about a fetus on the womb than a baby after it’s born. I guess their success or failure is on them once they’re out in the world.

Republicans aren't responsible for a baby after it's born...the parents are.  I know this is a concept that Democrats really struggle with, but it's true.

Democrats also like to use this lame argument to make themselves feel better about systematically killing the unborn.

And yes, someone's success or failure is on them when they are out in the real world, which is space most libs don't live in.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, UT alum said:

Look, this started with asking me three party platforms that are most important to me. I did not mention abortion among them. I’d appreciate you not throwing that card at me every time you feel the need to vilify liberals.

Sorry, it's a major piece of your party platform that you have to own.

Don't blame the messenger for repeating your own message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, UT alum said:

How do you figure military got it right buying $1000 hammers? 

I got to give a shout out to the interstate highway system, national air traffic control, clean air and water systems. A lot of this stuff is contracted out to private industry, but government designs and oversees the projects like any owner. I imagine the Erie Canal was a feather in the government’s cap back in the day. SBA has helped a lot of entrepreneurs. Block grants to states have helped build sanitary systems and transportation systems. It ain’t all bad, Reagan. Anywhere you got gobs of monkey there’ll be corruption, whether it be private or public. Anywhere you got large numbers of employees there will be bureaucracy, private or public. It ain’t us vs them - we all in this together.

Let's look at what the government runs 100%:  The Postal Service.  Runs huge deficits every year.  In the Billions if I'm not mistaken.  Private companies do a much better job.  Now, socialized medicine:  We already have an example of what a 100% ran government entity in that field looks like.  It's called the VA.  Ran terribly!  And this is what you want everyone to be subjected to?  It's always easy to do the wrong thing.  It's easy to say universal healthcare for all.  It's hard to do the right thing.  One has to work at it.  The government is not set up to fulfill this.  Again -- read the 10th Amendment.  The founding father's were brilliant.  If we would have followed their outline we would not be in this 100 Trillion dollar debt of unfunded liabilities.  And you and your side want to make it worst by taking over the health care system?  Like I said -- it's easy to say it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Republicans aren't responsible for a baby after it's born...the parents are.  I know this is a concept that Democrats really struggle with, but it's true.

Democrats also like to use this lame argument to make themselves feel better about systematically killing the unborn.

And yes, someone's success or failure is on them when they are out in the real world, which is space most libs don't live in.

Policy speaks for itself.

From infancy it’s all on them?

My world is as real as yours.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, UT alum said:

Policy speaks for itself.

From infancy it’s all on them?

My world is as real as yours.

 

What policy?

From infancy it's all on the parents, that's another thing myself and many others have miraculously done, raise kids with no help from the gov.

In your world, no one has to take responsibility for their actions, the gov will always have their back.

The good news for you is your side is winning because the takers are beginning to outnumber the makers.

It will be great for the takers until the makers run out of money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LumRaiderFan said:

Sorry, it's a major piece of your party platform that you have to own.

Don't blame the messenger for repeating your own message.

I answered the question as posed. I support a woman’s right to choose. I don’t support late term. Democrats don’t require we walk in lock step as it appears  the Republican Party does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, LumRaiderFan said:

What policy?

From infancy it's all on the parents, that's another thing myself and many others have miraculously done, raise kids with no help from the gov.

In your world, no one has to take responsibility for their actions, the gov will always have their back.

The good news for you is your side is winning because the takers are beginning to outnumber the makers.

It will be great for the takers until the makers run out of money.

You don’t know my world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, stevenash said:

Let me see if I understand this correctly.   He doesn't know your world but you are intimately familiar with his?   translation-  the trite hackneyed banal lefty contention that they are "smarter" and know what is good for everyone else

When did I claim to know his world? I don’t define people by their politics, nor do I presume to know their world because of party affiliation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

I answered the question as posed. I support a woman’s right to choose. I don’t support late term. Democrats don’t require we walk in lock step as it appears  the Republican Party does.

Guilty as charged...we walk lock-step in support of a babies right to live.

 

1 hour ago, UT alum said:

You don’t know my world.

I know your world very well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,206
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    Ceb2000
    Newest Member
    Ceb2000
    Joined



  • Posts

    • You got a LOT more than that, you’ve got Riceland filling up. GCM is dropping down from 23-6A back down to 5A in ‘26.  GCCISD is redrawing attendance zones to make sure of that.  At the same time, BH was only about 100 students under the 6A threshold last time UIL drew districts so BH is definitely going up to 6A when those maps get redrawn, probably right into the empty spot in 23-6A GCM is leaving when they drop down.
    • Like I said, even if it’s only 10% of the 100 kids BHISD takes from GCCISD each year, that’s 10 athletes per year and that’s being generous.  You’re right about the jobs with BHISD, BTW.  There’s more than 1 athlete from Baytown originally who got transferred to BHISD after a job opened up for Mama.
    • Here’s a link to another story about it This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up
    • It’s behind a paywall but here’s Baytown Sun’s story on it.  It was reported on in other papers statewide so if you search by the date I think you’ll find other stories on it. UIL strengthens student transfer rules By Ron McDowell [email protected] Oct 18, 2024   In order to maintain a level playing field for all member schools, the University Interscholastic League strengthened rules regarding transfer student eligibility at its most recent meeting in Austin. Every year thousands of students transfer schools in the state of Texas. A student’s ability to participate in UIL sanctioned activities may be limited base on the reasons for the transfer. A change in family status, work transfers, enrollment in an academic magnet program, or a move across town, receive scrutiny, but only rarely does one of these reasons result in the loss of eligibility. The only reason to automatically cause the loss of participation eligibility is a transfer for athletic purposes. The current rule, which has been in place since 1981, does not require a Previous Athletic Participation Form (PAPFs) to be submitted if the student-athlete does not participate in a varsity level sport during the first year of enrollment. There has been growing concern among some member schools, that other members are breaking the current rule and creating “super teams” with new transfer enrollees, and that the UIL is not doing enough to police, what appear to be, the inordinate number of transfers among high school athletes. To mitigate these concerns, the UIL approved a proposal to expand the power of the State Executive Committee (SEC) and allow it to investigate schools based upon the number of PAPFs submitted. Schools that submit an inordinate number of PAPFs would face heightened scrutiny and possible public reprimand and future sanctions. The UIL has also changed the requirements for PAPF submission, mandating that the form be submitted before a grade 9-12 transfer student may participate at any level of school athletics. This is a marked departure from the current policy which encourages schools not to complete PAPFs for students who transfer in, if the school believes that the student will not play a varsity sport in the first year the student is enrolled at the new school. Some critics of the current system think that the change doesn’t go far enough. Speaking on background, one local school district source suggested that there should be an automatic year wait for transfer students due to the number of loopholes in the waiver process. “If a student transfers, it should be a year out of competition automatically,” the source said. In addition, the UIL also approved a proposal that gives the SEC the power to appoint an independent administrator to oversee the conduct of the local District Executive Committee (DEC) if it is determined that the DEC is not consistently enforcing the rules of the governing body. The change is significant since all appeals that a school brings, starts and usually ends with the DEC. That includes the determination of transfer student eligibility. It is believed that with the implementation of this change, schools in a UIL district will be less likely to face retribution from the DEC chair and other members. The policy changes will go into effect, Aug. 1, 2025 This is the hidden content, please Sign In or Sign Up  
    • I was hoping WOS was going to win. To get another chance to redeem ourself. Silsbee did not look good in that game and has not played consistent during the season. Hopefully against La Vega they will play 4quarters of football
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...