Obama to support ground zero mosque

Page 7 of 8 First ... 5678 Last

  1. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    He was chairman of the PLO, purposefully inciting violence and hatred against Israelis.
    I asked you about his designation as a terrorist, specifically under the Regan admin, and instead you offer me a canned response. Let's chalk it up to you not knowing the history of his political involvement in the middle east, be it the Lebanese war or otherwise, and how that played into how our government came to view him through different administrations. I don't mean for this to come off as disrespectful, but I think you're emoting over issues of which you don't have a clear understanding.


  2. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    I asked you about his designation as a terrorist, specifically under the Regan admin, and instead you offer me a canned response. Let's chalk it up to you not knowing the history of his political involvement in the middle east, be it the Lebanese war, or otherwise and how that played into how our government came to view him through different administrations.
    Again, more liberal elitist bull****. He was president of an organization whose stated goal was and still is the destruction of "The Zionist Entity," which is still in the stated charter of the organization as it is displayed at the UN. You may need more than that to designate a group or a person running the group as a terrorist, rational people don't.

    And as always with liberal elitist snobs, you try and play an educational slight of hand, ignoring the fact that Araft has nothing to do with the issue of the mosque, or the issue of burning of Quarans. So when you can't win with logic or common sense, redirect to something else. Pretty standard Obama tactic, along with your attempting to treat anyone who doesn't support your ideas as if their ideas deserve no merit.
    •   
       


  3. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Again, more liberal elitist bull****. He was president of an organization whose stated goal was and still is the destruction of "The Zionist Entity," which is still in the stated charter of the organization as it is displayed at the UN. You may need more than that to designate a group or a person running the group as a terrorist, rational people don't.

    And as always with liberal elitist snobs, you try and play an educational slight of hand, ignoring the fact that Araft has nothing to do with the issue of the mosque, or the issue of burning of Quarans. So when you can't win with logic or common sense, redirect to something else. Pretty standard Obama tactic, along with your attempting to treat anyone who doesn't support your ideas as if their ideas deserve no merit.
    Or conversely a lack of education with the accompanying "insecurity" factor, that causes one to lash out against those who choose to get themselves informed.

  4. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Or conversely a lack of education with the accompanying "insecurity" factor, that causes one to lash out against those who choose to get themselves informed.
    Informed or indoctrinated? From the way you respond to everything, its apparent that you have bought the liberal agenda hook line and sinker, so i'd consider you indoctrinated more than educated.

    It doesn't take a ton of information to see that Raouf has spent money out of his pocket to fund terrorist related activities like the boat attempting to provoke violence at the israeli blockade, nor does it take a ton of information to see that our state department (in what seems like a total 180 degree twist on their usual stance of "separation of church and state") is paying for him as a religious person to go raise funds for his mosque. I guess that leaves him more money to send to Hamas and they like that?

  5. I like Bacon with my Ad Hominem Grits.
    Evolutionary Muse - Inspire to Evolve
    Flawless Skin Couture - We give you the tools to make you Flawless
    •   
       


  6. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Informed or indoctrinated? From the way you respond to everything, its apparent that you have bought the liberal agenda hook line and sinker, so i'd consider you indoctrinated more than educated.

    It doesn't take a ton of information to see that Raouf has spent money out of his pocket to fund terrorist related activities like the boat attempting to provoke violence at the israeli blockade, nor does it take a ton of information to see that our state department (in what seems like a total 180 degree twist on their usual stance of "separation of church and state") is paying for him as a religious person to go raise funds for his mosque. I guess that leaves him more money to send to Hamas and they like that?
    Again...again..and for good measure another again...what are your sources, and Sean Hannity's Twitter account doesn't count.

    I'm just going to let you win and FYI it's spelled Qur'an. =)

  7. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Again...again..and for good measure another again...what are your sources, and Sean Hannity's Twitter account doesn't count.

    I'm just going to let you win and FYI it's spelled Qur'an. =)
    Ad Hominem....those damn "elitist" words.

  8. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Again...again..and for good measure another again...what are your sources, and Sean Hannity's Twitter account doesn't count.

    I'm just going to let you win and FYI it's spelled Qur'an. =)
    Again, its pointless to give you any sources, as you'll just claim they are driven by a conservate agenda regardless of who they are. Your willingness to only accept liberal news sources as being real news is no better. Again, a standard obamaphile response, claim any source that doesn't agree with you of being unworthy as a source. The Nazis did it in Gernmany too, and its been used quite successfully in numerous Communist regimes as well.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Again, more liberal elitist bull****.
    Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    And as always with liberal elitist snobs, you try and play an educational slight of hand
    I love when conservatives use ther terms liberal elite and argue against the use of education.


    BTW, since we are talking about what should and shouldn't happen based on the stereotypes of a particular religion, let me quote my man Jon Stewart:

    "You can build a Catholic church next to a playground, but should you?"
    Just inject.
    Facebook:
    www.facebook.com/heretostudy

  10. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Again, its pointless to give you any sources, as you'll just claim they are driven by a conservate agenda regardless of who they are. Your willingness to only accept liberal news sources as being real news is no better. Again, a standard obamaphile response, claim any source that doesn't agree with you of being unworthy as a source. The Nazis did it in Gernmany too, and its been used quite successfully in numerous Communist regimes as well.
    You mean my unwillingness to accept a "blog" entry as written by your plumber, then yes I'm unwilling. From reading the majority of your posts, it's clear you have a limited understanding of your own position, much less anyone else's, which is why you attack those of us who sought to educate ourselves. I'd take it one step further if I could and state those without an education, shouldn't be allowed near a voting booth or given a pair scissors.

  11. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    You mean my unwillingness to accept a "blog" entry as written by your plumber, then yes I'm unwilling.
    And I wonder who dsade was accusing of ad hominem attacks....

  12. Quote Originally Posted by HereToStudy View Post
    I love when conservatives use ther terms liberal elite and argue against the use of education.
    Does it have anything to do with my educational level? Because nobody knows what mine is. But that doesn't mean I have to buy into the ridiculous liberal progressive agenda as is forced down peoples throats at colleges as the liberal progressives have a lock on educational unions. Its just another form of brainwashing as far as i'm concerned.


    At this point, a student can't question stimulus spending or socialized healthcare in the open at most colleges without risking their graduation.

  13. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Does it have anything to do with my educational level? Because nobody knows what mine is. But that doesn't mean I have to buy into the ridiculous liberal progressive agenda as is forced down peoples throats at colleges as the liberal progressives have a lock on educational unions. Its just another form of brainwashing as far as i'm concerned.


    At this point, a student can't question stimulus spending or socialized healthcare in the open at most colleges without risking their graduation.
    I think it has everything to do with one's educational level...EVERYTHING.

  14. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Does it have anything to do with my educational level? Because nobody knows what mine is. But that doesn't mean I have to buy into the ridiculous liberal progressive agenda as is forced down peoples throats at colleges as the liberal progressives have a lock on educational unions. Its just another form of brainwashing as far as i'm concerned.


    At this point, a student can't question stimulus spending or socialized healthcare in the open at most colleges without risking their graduation.
    Very untrue.

    First I was not questioning your education, you can have 5 PHDs for all I know, I never made any assumptions toward your education level.

    "liberal progressive agenda" - Add this one to the list of buzz words/phrases I love to hear.

    The lock on education units is not enforced. A college will not choose to only accept liberals, it just so happens that many who attend college are/become liberals. Take that for what you will, but I attach no assumptions to it.

    Please do not make the comment that a student questioning liberal politics fears losing their graduation. I come from an extremely liberal campus. Loyola University, although a Jesuit private college, has an extremely liberal population, which could be the results of many factors, including being an urban campus, but the why really doesnt matter.

    The fact of the matter is, our college has a college republicans club, has had numerous republican political figures give presentations, hell, we even had ann coulter do a discussion on our campus. If we allowed that sandpaper-vag on our campus, why then would we, "the liberal progressive elitist snobs" disallow republicans to graduate?
    Just inject.
    Facebook:
    www.facebook.com/heretostudy

  15. Two things I've learned from this thread:


    1) This country is having more and more problems.

    2) This country is becoming more and more liberal.

  16. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Does it have anything to do with my educational level? Because nobody knows what mine is. But that doesn't mean I have to buy into the ridiculous liberal progressive agenda as is forced down peoples throats at colleges as the liberal progressives have a lock on educational unions. Its just another form of brainwashing as far as i'm concerned.


    At this point, a student can't question stimulus spending or socialized healthcare in the open at most colleges without risking their graduation.
    Having worked in education for about a decade, this is over the top. Just from experience, and I work in on of the worst states at the moment: NJ

  17. Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    Having worked in education for about a decade, this is over the top. Just from experience, and I work in on of the worst states at the moment: NJ
    A state where $24,000 a year is spent per student in Newark yet they can't even manage to get below a 50% dropout rate because of incompetent teachers with tenure and not being able to get rid of them due to the union isn't exactly an example of what education should be. Just sayin

  18. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    A state where $24,000 a year is spent per student in Newark yet they can't even manage to get below a 50% dropout rate because of incompetent teachers with tenure and not being able to get rid of them due to the union isn't exactly an example of what education should be. Just sayin
    Oh...so that is whats going on in Newark? Thanks for clarifying. I bet it has nothing to do with the high crime rates, the high stuent classification rates for Sp.Ed or the lack of parental involvement in their childrens education. Gotcha

    BTW, I have quite a few colleagues that I know well in Newark (education is a small world). They are hardly bad teachers. However, since you generalized and certainly never have a neocon bias, I am in the wrong.

    Havent you learned yet Easy? Being so far one side politically (which ever side it is) is typically wrong.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    A state where $24,000 a year is spent per student in Newark yet they can't even manage to get below a 50% dropout rate because of incompetent teachers with tenure and not being able to get rid of them due to the union isn't exactly an example of what education should be. Just sayin
    You speak in such broad terms, reminds me very much of Bush Jr, in other words a very limited understanding of nuanced issues, attributes of an ineffective leader.

    There isn't a hint of nuance or context within any of your arguments. Yes it costs between 22-24k per student in Newark, and yes graduation rates are low, because much of the priority is focused on crime reduction, one of the major factors as to why the best teachers have opted to go elsewhere. It's much easier to allocate funds in a suburb, than it is in an urban area, where you have a much broader range of issues to deal with, such as what AE14 alluded to in prior post.

    You make these sweeping observations (none of them spelled or articulated correctly but that's another subject altogether), without a shred of context behind them. I understand the conservative approach is to oversimplify life, it's much easier to comprehend simple than it is to observe the facts.

  20. Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    Oh...so that is whats going on in Newark? Thanks for clarifying. I bet it has nothing to do with the high crime rates, the high stuent classification rates for Sp.Ed or the lack of parental involvement in their childrens education. Gotcha

    BTW, I have quite a few colleagues that I know well in Newark (education is a small world). They are hardly bad teachers. However, since you generalized and certainly never have a neocon bias, I am in the wrong.

    Havent you leanred yet Easy? Being so far one side politically (which ever side it is) is typically wrong.
    No, those things are also factors, however having one of the worst rates of graduation in the country coupled with one of the highest costs of public education in the country is pretty ridiculous. Its obvious that what the teacher are doing (whether it be the grade school teachers earlier on, or the high school teachers themselves) isn't working. In the private sector, when an employee isn't performing according to expectations do they keep their job? No, but as a teacher you do. One of Charlie Christ's last actions as governor was to veto a bill passed by the state of florida congress setting strict guidelines for teacher performance, and any teacher who falls below those guidelines for 4 years out of 5 loses their job.

    Not all teachers are bad, I've known many good ones, as well as many horrible ones. How many bad teachers (or principals, or guidance counselors, etc) does it take to wreck education? Why should parents have to tolerate incompetence in teachers just because they've been there a while?

    And i'm not a neocon Just very financially conservative, and a firm believer in minimalistic federal government, with individual state governments having more control. Local issues, local solutions. I'd be a constitutionalist except they are psychos religiously, and libertarians just don't quite cut it either.

    Half the time in threads like this I just play devils advocate

  21. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    You speak in such broad terms, reminds me very much of Bush Jr, in other words a very limited understanding of nuanced issues, so you regurgitate the same talking points over and over.

    There isn't a hint of nuance or context within any of your arguments. Yes it costs between 22-24k per student in Newark, and yes graduation rates are low, because much of the priority is focused on crime reduction, one of the major factors as to why the best teachers have opted to go elsewhere. It's much easier to allocate funds in a suburb, than it is in an urban area, where you have a much broader range of issues to deal with, such as what AE14 alluded to in prior post.

    You make these sweeping observations (none of them spelled or articulated correctly but that's another subject altogether), without a shred of context behind them. I understand the conservative approach is to oversimplify life, it's much easier to comprehend simple than it is to observe the facts.
    Again, who was it dsade was referring to on ad hominem grits I wonder....

    and again, why continue to throw more and more and more money on what doesn't work? This is just like stimulus packages in congress. One of the definitions of insanity is repeatedly performing the same steps, and expecting a different result. There is no reason why it should cost more to educate 2 students in Newark to have one of them drop out than it costs to educate 6 students in Los Angeles.

  22. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    No, those things are also factors, however having one of the worst rates of graduation in the country coupled with one of the highest costs of public education in the country is pretty ridiculous. Its obvious that what the teacher are doing (whether it be the grade school teachers earlier on, or the high school teachers themselves) isn't working. In the private sector, when an employee isn't performing according to expectations do they keep their job? No, but as a teacher you do. One of Charlie Christ's last actions as governor was to veto a bill passed by the state of florida congress setting strict guidelines for teacher performance, and any teacher who falls below those guidelines for 4 years out of 5 loses their job.

    Not all teachers are bad, I've known many good ones, as well as many horrible ones. How many bad teachers (or principals, or guidance counselors, etc) does it take to wreck education? Why should parents have to tolerate incompetence in teachers just because they've been there a while?

    And i'm not a neocon Just very financially conservative, and a firm believer in minimalistic federal government, with individual state governments having more control. Local issues, local solutions. I'd be a constitutionalist except they are psychos religiously, and libertarians just don't quite cut it either.

    Half the time in threads like this I just play devils advocate

    LEt me ask you this: if this is ridiculous, how do you entice the best teachers, administrators etc... to go there? Based on the crime issues, and other problems based on expectations (and the silly NCLB) what would pull a good teacher there?

    For me personally, I would have no reason to do it. I taught in a very blue collar district before, that had a higer crime rate, and to be honest I have no desire to deal with that issue again.

    I do agree that there are problems with tenure and would welcome a 3 year tenure evaluation(I am a tenured teacher mind you) as I know there are some horrible ones. However, to blame newark on teachers is ludicrous

  23. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Again, who was it dsade was referring to on ad hominem grits I wonder....

    and again, why continue to throw more and more and more money on what doesn't work? This is just like stimulus packages in congress. One of the definitions of insanity is repeatedly performing the same steps, and expecting a different result. There is no reason why it should cost more to educate 2 students in Newark to have one of them drop out than it costs to educate 6 students in Los Angeles.
    Easier to address the symptoms, than it is to cure the disease approach? So I ask you what plan would you implement to solve education spending? I'm going to hazard a guess and say that you don't have one, because you're unaware of all the underlying issues in and around Newark, in other words your opinions are uninformed, I.E. talking points. You take a very simple approach to complex issues.

  24. Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    LEt me ask you this: if this is ridiculous, how do you entice the best teachers, administrators etc... to go there? Based on the crime issues, and other problems based on expectations (and the silly NCLB) what would pull a good teacher there?

    For me personally, I would have no reason to do it. I taught in a very blue collar district before, that had a higer crime rate, and to be honest I have no desire to deal with that issue again.

    I do agree that there are problems with tenure and would welcome a 3 year tenure evaluation(I am a tenured teacher mind you) as I know there are some horrible ones. However, to blame newark on teachers is ludicrous
    With no ability to change the teachers, calling blaming it on teachers ludicrous is silly. They are involved, they are part of the process. Trying to remove all blame is ludicrous. Are they 100% at fault? No there are other environmental issues, however in other areas with those same environmental issues costs are lower and results are better.

    I think part of the solution there is starting with more better earlier education. A second significant part is use of things like the Dolly Parton Imagination Library, a non-profit run by The United Way in a lot of areas (may be run by others elsewhere). Its a program that monthly puts a single new book in childrens hands from birth to age 5, when they should be starting school. Studies have already shown that the number of books in a house is a better predictor of a child's success in school than the eduction level of their parents. So you start earlier, have the children be better prepared at grade school, and then make sure grade school is taught well.

    Getting better teachers in the high schools themselves is a tougher one though, because who the hell would want to subject themselves to that? My daughter goes to a high school ranked around #140 nationally, and there are still gangs and drug dealers there. I had pondered as a part of a first "retirement" going in to teaching, but my skillset would lend itself best to high school teaching, and screw that

  25. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Easier to address the symptoms, than it is to cure the disease approach? So I ask you what plan would you implement to solve education spending? I'm going to hazard a guess and say that you don't have one, because you're unaware of all the underlying issues in and around Newark, in other words your opinions are uninformed, I.E. talking points. You take a very simple approach to complex issues.
    More and more ad hominem attacks. You can't find a direct flaw in what I say, so instead you call my opinions uninformed. It must be wonderful to be you.

    Apparently you think its a success story to spend 3x what the rest of the country does to have half the students not graduate, or that teachers have nothing to do with the education that children receive. Pick which one of the two it is.

  26. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    With no ability to change the teachers, calling blaming it on teachers ludicrous is silly. They are involved, they are part of the process. Trying to remove all blame is ludicrous. Are they 100% at fault? No there are other environmental issues, however in other areas with those same environmental issues costs are lower and results are better.

    I think part of the solution there is starting with more better earlier education. A second significant part is use of things like the Dolly Parton Imagination Library, a non-profit run by The United Way in a lot of areas (may be run by others elsewhere). Its a program that monthly puts a single new book in childrens hands from birth to age 5, when they should be starting school. Studies have already shown that the number of books in a house is a better predictor of a child's success in school than the eduction level of their parents. So you start earlier, have the children be better prepared at grade school, and then make sure grade school is taught well.

    Getting better teachers in the high schools themselves is a tougher one though, because who the hell would want to subject themselves to that? My daughter goes to a high school ranked around #140 nationally, and there are still gangs and drug dealers there. I had pondered as a part of a first "retirement" going in to teaching, but my skillset would lend itself best to high school teaching, and screw that
    When you say teach high school, are you referring to a real one, or the one Billy Madison went to?

  27. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    With no ability to change the teachers, calling blaming it on teachers ludicrous is silly. They are involved, they are part of the process. Trying to remove all blame is ludicrous. Are they 100% at fault? No there are other environmental issues, however in other areas with those same environmental issues costs are lower and results are better.

    I think part of the solution there is starting with more better earlier education. A second significant part is use of things like the Dolly Parton Imagination Library, a non-profit run by The United Way in a lot of areas (may be run by others elsewhere). Its a program that monthly puts a single new book in childrens hands from birth to age 5, when they should be starting school. Studies have already shown that the number of books in a house is a better predictor of a child's success in school than the eduction level of their parents. So you start earlier, have the children be better prepared at grade school, and then make sure grade school is taught well.

    Getting better teachers in the high schools themselves is a tougher one though, because who the hell would want to subject themselves to that? My daughter goes to a high school ranked around #140 nationally, and there are still gangs and drug dealers there. I had pondered as a part of a first "retirement" going in to teaching, but my skillset would lend itself best to high school teaching, and screw that
    I am in no way saying that teachers arent part of the problem. I am referring to your inference that they are the entire problem. It is multifaceted for sure.

    In terms of submitting yourself to it. I will never forget my first day student teaching years ago, and a very troubled high school junior at the time (this is 10 years ago) decided he didnt like my "attitude" and he would challenge me to a fight. It was certainly not something that I had ever thought about or was taught about in grad school. It is not worth the drama at times. Even where I teach now (which is top 10 in NJ) there are still some problems, not like the ones before, but I have had kids come to class too high and then vomit in the room. I have stories that astound me and I was there.

    Education has changed so greatly that it can be a scary prospect. You should try it though Easy. If you find the right school, the job is a friggin blast.

    I will say this, when some of my male student get a little too ****y, I offer them the opportunity to come to the weight room to lift with me for a bit, and I get to use a real high volume routine. Their behavior changes drastically

  28. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    More and more ad hominem attacks. You can't find a direct flaw in what I say, so instead you call my opinions uninformed. It must be wonderful to be you.

    Apparently you think its a success story to spend 3x what the rest of the country does to have half the students not graduate, or that teachers have nothing to do with the education that children receive. Pick which one of the two it is.
    Again...what plan would you implement to limit education spending? WE ALL KNOW THAT'S A COMPLEX QUESTION, A BIT ABOVE YOUR PAY GRADE, BUT WHY NOT ENLIGHTEN US ALL WITH YOUR VAST KNOWLEDGE OF BUDGETARY SPENDING?

    You offer a lot of opinions...but never any real ANSWERS.

  29. Quote Originally Posted by southpaw23 View Post
    Again...what plan would you implement to limit education spending? WE ALL KNOW THAT'S A COMPLEX QUESTION, A BIT ABOVE YOUR PAY GRADE, BUT WHY NOT ENLIGHTEN US ALL WITH YOUR VAST KNOWLEDGE OF BUDGETARY SPENDING?
    I have taken school finance, and it sucks. Just thought I would throw that in there

  30. Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    I have taken school finance, and it sucks. Just thought I would throw that in there
    I was a dual major, Finance and Political Science. =)
  •   

      
     

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Ground beef or ground turkey?
    By Pezz in forum Bulking
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 05-05-2011, 05:42 PM
  2. 80% ground beef?
    By Machwon1 in forum Nutrition / Health
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-22-2011, 09:44 AM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-17-2010, 10:12 PM
  4. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-30-2007, 10:44 PM
  5. Testing Ground
    By Fabulous One in forum Millennium Sport Technologies
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: 09-28-2007, 02:03 PM
Log in
Log in