(03-25-2015 06:01 PM)HarmonOliphantOberlanderDevine Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:49 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:34 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:25 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:13 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/13.../page/full

And do you know why they have to do that? Because the GOP seems content with weakening education as much as possible by either pulling funding that should be going to students or cutting pensions/teacher salaries.

Not to mention it's usually the GOP not the Dems who actually try to alter the course curriculum with their "reversing the liberal bias" and/or "adding patriotism" BS.

Don't believe me? Learn for yourself:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answ...ort-finds/

and because Texas is the single largest buyer of Textbooks, the publishers conform to THEIR standards and it ends up affecting pretty much every State.

You need to be at the highest level of stupidity to claim that the political base that is fighting to improve quality of education by improving funding is somehow the "anti education" party. But yeah, thanks for quoting Hitler to help tank your own argument.

Please tell me more about public education spending.

That "source" is an ultra right wing blog that is shady at best.

I know it's msnbc but come on, you really can't deny basic political science at this point.

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker wants a $300 million funding cut for higher education, and Gov. Bobby Jindal has proposed the same level of cuts in Louisiana. Arizona Gov. Doug Ducey wants at least a $75 million cut to higher ed, and Kansas Gov. Sam Brownback is aiming to cut $45 million from K-12 schools and higher education combined.

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/gop-governors...shortfalls

You can spend all the money you want, but education won't improve until you have less powerful teacher unions. More money doesn't always equal better results.

I thank God that I was homeschooled, sent to a Catholic high school and avoided the cesspool of public education.

and weaker teacher unions doesn't mean improved education either.

Like any business model. if you want to succeed, your priority is to attract the best amount of talent into your work force. So when the states take a position that kills off the desirability of a teaching position, it's the easiest way to tank the efficiency of our education dollars.

(03-25-2015 05:36 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  The cultural wars about pretty much over. The conservative side has lost.

That side also has lost four of the last six Presidential elections and has lost the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections.

More importantly for the future, they may have lost and will continue to lose the demographic battle. Those trends do not bode well for the future for that side of these issues.

Funny thing is, I actually expect to continue to lose most of those battles. It will only get worse and worse for social conservatives - just prophecy being fulfilled.

So the Black Plague, Islam sweeping the West during the dark ages, widespread slavery, child abuse/labor, Genocide of multiple nations, etc wasn't enough to draw God's wrath, but two guys getting married triggers end times? Damn, you social conservatives have whack-o priorities.

Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

(03-25-2015 05:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:50 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

John, If I own and live in a 4 unit apartment building do you think I should be allowed to not rent someone because they are gay, or a jew, a muslim, or a protected class?

You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a [b]prick[/b] right now.

Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

(03-25-2015 06:12 PM)dbackjon Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:36 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:32 PM)TerryD Wrote:  The cultural wars about pretty much over. The conservative side has lost.

That side also has lost four of the last six Presidential elections and has lost the popular vote in five of the last six Presidential elections.

More importantly for the future, they may have lost and will continue to lose the demographic battle. Those trends do not bode well for the future for that side of these issues.

Funny thing is, I actually expect to continue to lose most of those battles. It will only get worse and worse for social conservatives - just prophecy being fulfilled.

So the Black Plague, Islam sweeping the West during the dark ages, widespread slavery, child abuse/labor, Genocide of multiple nations, etc wasn't enough to draw God's wrath, but two guys getting married triggers end times? Damn, you social conservatives have whack-o priorities.

Who said that woukd trigger the end times? That, and the general turning away are symptoms.

(03-25-2015 06:15 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:50 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:54 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  John, If I own and live in a 4 unit apartment building do you think I should be allowed to not rent someone because they are gay, or a jew, a muslim, or a protected class?

You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a [b]prick[/b] right now.

Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

I'd say the first rule of someone losing is resorting to the "you lost for (insert BS reason)" line. Speaking of which, how the hell is asking me what my personal belief is a question of winning or losing? There is never a right or wrong answer when that is the question

This bonehead discussion wasn't reasonable and it certainly wasn't a debate. You were just being a prick and I called you out on it.

(03-25-2015 06:14 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

(03-25-2015 06:24 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:15 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:50 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:06 PM)john01992 Wrote:  You can reject a potential tenant for a variety of reasons. But those reasons can't be on the basis of ethnicity, religion, sexual orientation, race, gender, etc.

Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a [b]prick[/b] right now.

Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

I'd say the first rule of someone losing is resorting to the "you lost for (insert BS reason)" line. Speaking of which, how the hell is asking me what my personal belief is a question of winning or losing? There is never a right or wrong answer when that is the question

This bonehead discussion wasn't reasonable and it certainly wasn't a debate. You were just being a prick and I called you out on it.

2 time you have called me a slur. Not nice.

(03-25-2015 08:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:24 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:15 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:50 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Not what I asked? Should I be allowed? Last time I checked it was legal to do such. You a Muslim, in Dearborn, how hates Jews should legally be allowed to say nah I am renting to a jew?

go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a [b]prick[/b] right now.

Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

I'd say the first rule of someone losing is resorting to the "you lost for (insert BS reason)" line. Speaking of which, how the hell is asking me what my personal belief is a question of winning or losing? There is never a right or wrong answer when that is the question

This bonehead discussion wasn't reasonable and it certainly wasn't a debate. You were just being a prick and I called you out on it.

2 time you have called me a slur. Not nice.

That's what you get when you try to troll other posters.

(03-25-2015 09:02 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 08:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:24 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:15 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 05:57 PM)john01992 Wrote:  go away dude.

You asked "do you think I should be allowed to..." so don't give me this s*** "not what I asked...last I checked it's legal" BS. You forfeited that talking point when you asked for my personal opinion. Stop being a [b]prick[/b] right now.

Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

I'd say the first rule of someone losing is resorting to the "you lost for (insert BS reason)" line. Speaking of which, how the hell is asking me what my personal belief is a question of winning or losing? There is never a right or wrong answer when that is the question

This bonehead discussion wasn't reasonable and it certainly wasn't a debate. You were just being a prick and I called you out on it.

2 time you have called me a slur. Not nice.

That's what you get when you try to troll other posters.

What trolling? you should apologize.

(03-25-2015 06:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:14 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

What is this? Link? I don't think I can see the whole image.

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Right "More tolerance" in our society has led us to take away the business and home of a 70 year old woman for refusing to make arrangements for a gay wedding..

"Tolerance"..

(03-25-2015 09:45 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:14 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

What is this? Link? I don't think I can see the whole image.

That settles it. A graph with blue lines that get bigger has to be legit.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-25-2015 09:48 PM)Bull_In_Exile Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:48 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:42 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 04:29 PM)john01992 Wrote:  The support for LGBT rights within this demographic is here to stay.

...thanks to leftists' strangle-hold over US public education.

Yeah, it must be some kinda secret liberal indoctrination process that has hijacked public education. Not the four century long trend of society becoming increasingly more tolerant.

Right "More tolerance" in our society has led us to take away the business and home of a 70 year old woman for refusing to make arrangements for a gay wedding..

"Tolerance"..

read the beginning of this thread. it's comments exactly like these which show just how backwards the GOP thinking is.

(03-25-2015 09:54 PM)Pigs N Heat BBQ Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:45 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:14 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

What is this? Link? I don't think I can see the whole image.

That settles it. A graph with blue lines that get bigger has to be legit.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Do you know what a title is?

(03-25-2015 10:09 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you know what a title is?

Does it have a source?
Does it have a date?
What proposition are you attempting to advance by presenting it?

(03-25-2015 10:09 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:54 PM)Pigs N Heat BBQ Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:45 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:14 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  Like I said, I gave you the data sources. Refute the findings with documented, unbiased facts or concede the argument.

No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

What is this? Link? I don't think I can see the whole image.

That settles it. A graph with blue lines that get bigger has to be legit.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Do you know what a title is?

I didn't need one man. Those blue lines getting bigger was all i needed to see. Forget about x and y axis and measurement values.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-25-2015 10:24 PM)Pigs N Heat BBQ Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 10:09 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:54 PM)Pigs N Heat BBQ Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:45 PM)blunderbuss Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:28 PM)john01992 Wrote:  No you gave me a BS image and tried to pass it by. An image that wasn't even relevant to the discussion at hand. Every single person who has a basic understanding of Republican/Democrat tendencies disagrees with you. As do the facts.

What is this? Link? I don't think I can see the whole image.

That settles it. A graph with blue lines that get bigger has to be legit.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

Do you know what a title is?

I didn't need one man. Those blue lines getting bigger was all i needed to see. Forget about x and y axis and measurement values.

Posted from my mobile device using the CSNbbs App

(03-25-2015 09:05 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 09:02 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 08:59 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:24 PM)john01992 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 06:15 PM)SuperFlyBCat Wrote:  Not surprised you used a word like. What is the 1st rule when losing, call someone a slur.
Not nice. Was having a very reasonable debate and you totally lose it.

I'd say the first rule of someone losing is resorting to the "you lost for (insert BS reason)" line. Speaking of which, how the hell is asking me what my personal belief is a question of winning or losing? There is never a right or wrong answer when that is the question

This bonehead discussion wasn't reasonable and it certainly wasn't a debate. You were just being a prick and I called you out on it.

2 time you have called me a slur. Not nice.

That's what you get when you try to troll other posters.

What trolling? you should apologize.

When you tell me "that's not what I asked" after I took the time to respond to your inquiry and gave my response to a question that you did in fact ask....yeah expect me to get pissy. You asked me whether I think X should be allowed (legal) or not. There is never a wrong answer to that, so responding to that as "you're wrong" is being a prick. Then to top it all off your "argument" was essentially taking the legal status of said question (which varies greatly by state) and had the nerve to pick the one the fits with your argument, while disregarding the others.

So when you do all that in a single post after I responded for the first time, it's pretty clear from my POV what your intentions are.

(03-25-2015 10:12 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(03-25-2015 10:09 PM)john01992 Wrote:  Do you know what a title is?

Does it have a source? Maybe?
Does it have a date? Not sure.
What proposition are you attempting to advance by presenting it? All of the above.