Kerry

[wm69]

baby girl

Why do people not see it as wrong when there are all these people who DON'T WORK AND DON'T PAY TAXES (and it's not because they can't work, it's because they don't have to work, because all the bleeding heart liberal welfare programs). These people get huge "earned imcome" checks every year that are 5 times what my tax return is. Know what my sin is? I work for a living. I make 30K year and support a family of four on that. I have 30K in student loans. I paid my way through school and worked my ass off while doing it, and now I'm still working my ass off and living paycheck to paycheck while the govenment takes 1/4 of my pay and redistrbutes it to the non working lazy ass people. THAT'S my problem with raising taxes. Marx would be proud of our quasi socialism in this country. That's also why I hate the fact that the "rich" pay a much higher PERCENTAGE of their income in taxes. That means if I ever make more, I get to look forward to giving a bigger PERCENTAGE of my income to the govt to waste. That's not right. Everyone should pay the same percentage of their income in taxes. Richer people still pay more in dollars because they earn more, but to say "they have it so they can afford it" is wealth redistribution, and that's straight socialism any way you slice it. I don't want a raise right now because I CAN'T AFFORD TO MAKE MORE. If I do the govt will just raise my taxes and I'll be taking home less than I do now. As for Bush, you can blame our current economy on Mr Clinton. The recession was started during his administration and his "surplus" never existed. The problem in this country is people want to pay less taxes, have more govt spending (preferably money coming back to them), and have a balanced budget. That's fiscally impossible. Oil prices now are again following the good ole "supply and demand" rule, where there's more demand than supply at X price so the price goes up till the counteract each other. Oil is a nonreplaceable resourse, so it ain't gonna get better. It might go down for awhile, but I expect to see $5 gal gas in the next 5-10 years. It's simple economics. As for voting to raise taxes, get the government programs going like welfare etc, (I like to jump around to keep you off guard), Alexander Tytler's view points right at this country

"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse (generous benefits) from the public treasury."

"From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising them the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship."

"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years.

These nations have progressed through this sequence:

From bondage to spiritual faith;
from spiritual faith to great courage;
from courage to liberty;
from liberty to abundance;
from abundance to selfishness;
from selfishness to complacency;
from complacency to apathy;
from apathy to dependence;
from dependency back again into bondage."


As best I can tell, we're right there in the apathy/dependence part. How do you "tax and spend" folks like that?

 

[90Xjay]

Amen!

 

[TwistedCU]

I know there are a lot of people on here with kids, and I haven't heard any of them say anything about their stance on education. Why? Perhaps these kids all attend private schools, and the public education system isn't important to them

Well Here I AM!!!!!!

I have a 5yr old and a 2 year old.
We choose to homeschool because the goverment schools (previously known as public schools) told God in the early 60's "Get out of here and take your book with you"

If you see a school bus with the name "Whatever I.S.D" that is a joke.
Local school boards do make decisons on education but only through the filter of the Federal Goverment who says what and how to teach. Most teachers I know are good decent people, who work for a broken, vile, institution that teaches children that they evolved from animals and wonders why they act like animals. I still have to pay local school taxes even though my kids don't attend so I am still vocal to the boad of education. I also spend over $1000 per year out of pocket for curriculum and supplies to properly teach with. Considering the alternative, I just don't mind the expense. BTW my 5 year old easily reads multiple vowel words and complete sentences and writes very well.

Great to hear there's another Homeschool family here on Jeepz, and for the SAME reasons! Good show my man!!!

My kids are 8,4,3, and 1. All of them will be homeschooled through 8th grade. Then it will be decided individually how they will finish their education, but it won't be a public school :!:

 

[TwistedCU]

Kerry may not be the best man for the Job folks I can reason with that but Bush is not even qualified to pop the pimples that are on Kerrys butt. Want to see me go Right Wing bring a canidate that is better than what you have now, next election.

That would be Senator John McCain. I hope. There. I kept the clipping to a minimum here Tug :wink:

 

[Special_K]

Kerry may not be the best man for the Job folks I can reason with that but Bush is not even qualified to pop the pimples that are on Kerrys butt.

HAHAHAHAHA. I just caught this tonight! FUNNY! :lol: :lol:

Tug rules!!!!

 

[dick_wilderness]

A few thoughts...

Kerry has held some very nuanced positions and has made some blatantly bad explanations of his positions at times, but when you look into the details of his position and logic, you find that his positions are typically very reasonable and responsible...whether or not you agree. Nuanced positions are not necessarily bad, but they don' t make for good sound bites and are easily manipulated. This is what the Bush campaign has taken advantage of and blown WAAAAAAY out of proportion. Unfortunately, the perception sticks with some people.

<b>KERRY'S GUN CONTROL RECORD</b>

For the record, Kerry's voting history does not indicate that he's some "scary" sociopath who's out to ban everyone's guns as some might have us believe. Futhermore, some of the underlying implications made by his opponents make Kerry's votes seem much more prohibitive and ominous than they really are. When you look at Kerry's voting record at <b>Project Vote Smart</b> you find that he's only voted for a firearm ban ONCE...and that was on semi-automatic assault weapons. All other votes of support were for very responsible, rational gun control bills often supported, if not introduced, by Republicans such as the Brady Bill (requiring a waiting period before taking possesion) and other bills requiring a background checks (for violent criminal activity) before buying a gun.

I spent a minute (or 90) doing a little research to verify this before I made the claim. The one firearm ban bill that Kerry voted for was S.1607/H.R.3355 in late-1993/early-1994. Here is a link as well as a summary of that bill with some of my comments:

<b>H.R. 3355 (S. 1607)</b>

SEC. 4502. RESTRICTION ON MANUFACTURE, TRANSFER, AND POSSESSION OF CERTAIN SEMIAUTOMATIC ASSAULT WEAPONS.
- Section 4502 of this bill, as the title suggests, restricts the manufacture, transfer and possession of certain semiautomatic assault weapons and large capacity ammunition feeding devices. But the bill also had several restrictions...

SEC. 4503. EXEMPTION FOR FIREARMS LAWFULLY POSSESSED PRIOR TO DATE OF ENACTMENT.
This section exluded anyone who possessed an affected firearm before the date the bill was passed.

SEC. 4504. EXEMPTION FOR CERTAIN HUNTING AND SPORTING FIREARMS.
3) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to--
``(A) any of the firearms, or replicas or duplicates of the
firearms, specified in Appendix A to this section, as such
firearms were manufactured on October 1, 1993;
``(B) any firearm that--
``(i) is manually operated by bolt, pump, lever, or
slide action;
``(ii) is an unserviceable firearm; or
``(iii) is an antique firearm;
``(C) any semiautomatic rifle that cannot accept a
detachable magazine that holds more than 5 rounds of
ammunition; or
``(D) any semiautomatic shotgun that cannot hold more than
5 rounds of ammunition in a fixed or detachable magazine.''.

SEC. 4505. EXEMPTIONS FOR GOVERNMENTAL AND EXPERIMENTAL USE.
- Reasonably self-explanatory.

WM69: Section 4503 would have certainly excluded your grandad's firearm, if not section 4504 as well, and that's provided that it came under the restrictions of Section 4502 in the first place.

I think many accusations that are often innocently repeated and passed along by Bush supporters (or should I say, Kerry-haters) are <u>half-truths</u> originated either by the campaign itself or other more rabid supporters who disregard facts and details since they have the intent of making the opponent look worse than he actually is. This happens in both parties, but this practice appears much more extreme with Bush (which is why I'm weighing-in to counter here).


<b>BUSH & FLIP-FLOPPING</b>

As for flip-flopping, Bush can "flip-flop" with the best of 'em. To quote a few factual sections from a WP article instead of my own words (for convenience):

<i>"In 2000, Bush said he would include carbon dioxide on a list of air pollutants requiring federal oversight, a stand he abandoned within weeks of taking office. A month after the Sept. 11 attacks, Bush's spokesman said the president believed a homeland security department that Democrats proposed was "just not necessary." A year after that, Bush had switched course and was lashing some Democrats for not moving quickly enough to approve the agency.

While Bush professes himself a strong free-trader, most other free-trade proponents said he bent on principle in March 2002 when he ordered tariffs on imported steel -- a move that resonated politically in electorally important industrial states such as Pennsylvania. Facing an escalating global trade dispute, he lifted the tariffs at the end of last year. " </i>

And often when his position remains the same, his reasons "flip-flop". Again, a factual section from a WP article:

<i>"He supported tax cuts in 2000 because he said they were affordable in a time of large government surpluses, and once in power he supported them amid rising deficits because he said the economy needed stimulation. The president's principal rationale for the Iraq invasion was to end Baghdad's suspected mass-weapons program and links to international terrorism. In the absence of compelling evidence of these, the main post-invasion rationale has been to rescue Iraq from a tyrant and support democracy in the greater Middle East. "</i>

In cases where someone's position remains the same and their reasons for that position change substantially, whether in government policy or in one-on-one dealings, it is typically that they're pushing a pre-determined position and the facts are being manipulated to make a case for that position. Combined with the fact that many key components of our foreign policy (and some much more subtle ones) precisely follow a disturbing foreign policy outline published by this administration in Sep 2000 is one of many major problems that I have with the Bush adminsitration.

I am not blinding myself with Kerry love but I do think a disproportionate number of mistruths, half-truths and lies being spread are against Kerry and are being perpetuated by certain rabid Bush supporters then naively passed along by others. Most arguments I hear against Kerry are simply based on sound bites...repeated over and over as one loose/distorted accusation is presented in more factual and/or extreme sense than most evidence actually supports...few of those accusations seem to hold up to detailed scrutiny. The crtiques that do remain (and there are some...as there would be with anyone) pale in comparison to the real issues I see with Bush. While I consider Bush's lack of certain cognitive and speaking skills sad, embarrassing, and pitiful for a President, that, in and of itself, is relatively minor among my list of reasons why I think he's been an overall poor--if not dangerous--president over the last four years.

But that's just my 2 cents worth.

I would rather have a dog fart in my face than read a post this long.

 

[mud4feet]

I would rather have a dog fart in my face than read a post this long.

to quote Monty Python...."I fart in your general direction" :lol:

signed,

the dog

 

[Tug-n-pull]

I live with a Boston Bull Dog and he farts like real bad, and I would rather read a post till sun up than to live with yet another one of his nasty stink attacks. Maybe I can send him for a visit! hehehe tug

 

[TwistedCU]

I live with a Boston Bull Dog and he farts like real bad, and I would rather read a post till sun up than to live with yet another one of his nasty stink attacks. Maybe I can send him for a visit! hehehe tug

T.M.I. :lol:

 

[mingez]

Yikes, I leave for a week, and this thread went a little stinky. And I'm not talking about Tug's Boston Bull Dog's gastro-intestinal issues. Holy Moley. :shock:

I have alot of respect for that whacky leftist pinko commie kool aid drinker Mingez

Ha hahahaha! Thanks? :lol:

BTW-- TC, I was out of town, so I didn't get your PM. Oh I DO like an ice cold glass of Kool Aid!!! :mrgreen:

 

[currupt4130]

88' Cherokee won't start

hmmmm i just started reading this thread and i spotted the bits on homeschooling and education. right now im a senior in highschool at a public school. in my opinion homeschooling is a great way to raise your kids with their religious beliefs but religion in public schools is not the way you see it. there are clubs that promote their meetings and even hold their meetings after school at our school. they are not affiliated with the school however. youth groups are another great way to promote religious beliefs among young people, i couldnt tell you how many people i hear talking about the activites that go on at their church or the kids that promote their youth groups and activities. i dont believe in home schooling and dont think i would ever do it with my kids. what happens when they get out in the real world? think about that, ive had friends come from home schooling that ive known personally for many years and make the transfer into highschools, public and private, and they totally change as a person. the sudden culture shock that changes when they switch from a homeschool enviroment to a mass school environment is absolutley amazing. IMHO, public school is a great thing unless you live where things are dangerous. i.e., downtown queens, brooklyn, chicago, etc, i think you get what im trying to say. the reason public schools are good is because it allows children to grow with people, learn how people change over time, allow them to make their own choices when faced with problems that mom and dad cant be there for, and for them to gain a social life unequaled to that of a homeschooled child. like i said, its a culture shock, that switch from home to highschool. and besides that, by sheltering them from public interaction like what goes on in public schools, your creating more adults that are going to be ignorant to how society is really run. they will find a little niche, be comfortable in it, and not be able to teach their kids but what they know inside their restrictive boundries. sorry if it sounds like im bashing you for choosing homeschooling, im just expressing my beliefs from my experiences with homeschooled kids.

and about kerry, i think everyone will thouroughly enjoy this site www.johnfkerrysucks.com

 

[TwistedCU]

TTT

Corrupt - I should clarify that my wife and I are not homeschooling because we want our children to learn about God, the Bible, and Jesus Christ. They will learn these things from us and from Church anyhow and hopefully it will have touched them when it comes time for them to make their own choices in life.

When I said we homeschool for the same reasons (one he listed was because they have removed God from public schools) I meant that the public schools have gone to hell (no pun intended - okay maybe a little). They have taken the ability to discipline away from the teachers and they are overcrowded, understaffed, and there is an increasing trend for teachers to get involved with recommending "evaluations" for hyperactive or "A.D.D." children. I have a neighbor that has to medicate her son or social services will intervene. This was a result of her taking her son to get evaluated at the strong urging of his teachers.

As for the social aspect, that is not a factor for my son (he's 8, the others are still preschool). He plays 4 sports, has weekly meetings with homeschool groups, is a Cub Scout, and after school, just about all of the kids around his age in the neighborhood are at our house.

It is a common arguement against homeschooling that a child may get a better tailored education, but will end up being "socially retarded". While this could be the case if a child is being sheltered from the world (which there are some that homeschool for that reason), it is not for us. My son can walk into a crowd of kids his age anywhere and he is right at home.

So, what happens to them when they get out into the "real world" as you put it? Well we are raising them in the real world. Difference being they will be better prepared than most, but thank you for your concern.

 

[currupt4130]

anytime, glad it was taken w/o contempt and that i can voice my opinion somewhere and have it understood rather than criticized

 

[mud4feet]

Very good answer, Twisted. Your children have good teachers.

 

[90Xjay]

It is a common arguement against homeschooling that a child may get a better tailored education, but will end up being "socially retarded". While this could be the case if a child is being sheltered from the world (which there are some that homeschool for that reason), it is not for us. My son can walk into a crowd of kids his age anywhere and he is right at home.

So, what happens to them when they get out into the "real world" as you put it? Well we are raising them in the real world. Difference being they will be better prepared than most, but thank you for your concern.

I aggree with TC's remarks above


Now to respond to more of your unabashed home-school bashing.

it allows children to grow with people, learn how people change over time, allow them to make their own choices when faced with problems that mom and dad cant be there for, and for them to gain a social life unequaled to that of a homeschooled child

What kind of social skills would do you think are important for our children?

Teen Sex, STD's, having abortions without parental consent. Getting condoms from the school nurse, learning how to duck gunfire in the school cafeteria, having to learn lies about evolution taught as truth and then be tested on lies, learning a politically correct version of history, learning to worship a tree on earth day, not the God to made the tree, learning about diversity instead of geography.
I respect your viewpoint, but for me having an adminstrator making more than a US Senator, who could not hold a job at Pizza Hut hiring child molesting 7th grade girl gym coaches is not my idea of quality education. My child will know all about society, I will not shield him from history and what is important, my charge as a parent is to protect his spirit and guard him from harm. While other kids are busy reading "Heather has 2 mommies" and watching "Harry Potter" in the school library, I might be on a field trip in Colorado learning about science or on the golf course with him for our gym class. Most of us who homeschool have made up our minds for countless reasons and just to instill what some deem as valuable "social" skills is not worth the price.

 

[mingez]

having to learn lies about evolution

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:

Rrrrriiiiigggghhhhhtttttt....... I did't have ANYTHING against homeschooling, but that statement leads me to believe otherwise. Sheesh.

::::::::EDIT::::::::::

Read post below...sorry, I was being a dick.

 

[currupt4130]

you know public school is not the satanic place you make it out to be 90xjay, when kids are put in situations and they are raised right they tend to make the right choices. thats where you come in as a parent. i respect your reasons for homsechooling your children but your views on public schools are completely amiss. the nurses dont hand out condoms, you only get stds if you have sex, a properly raised child in a christian environment is less apt to make that decision anyways, and most schools are not institutions which house violence. it is people with views that are ignorant, who then spread those views to other people and it then becomes a game of telephone. then you end up with a highly altered version of what a highschool really is. yes all of those things exist in high school but the teachers dont sit there and promote it, it is promoted by those that do it, (a select few) and looked down upon by those who dont.

 

[Junkpile]

currupt, then things have changed since I graduated from public HS in 93. Here, let me present you with a funny example. We were in the cafeteria in 11th grade when this guy made the mistake of bumping into a pregnant girl. Outside, her and two friends caught up with the little guy and beat the crap out of him. I'm talking about a beating where hands full of hair got ripped out, scratches, and plenty of kicking......all while we sat in the cafeteria sipping on our Sun Drop brand soda bottles that were half full of Everclear alcohol :roll:
My girlfriends homeroom teacher had been having an affair with the soccer coach for awhile, and after his wife and kids found out, he then married the teacher in my 12th grade year......and all the other teachers seemed to be supportive. There was the science teacher who was married to his ex-babysitter, who was also an ex-student if I'm not mistaken. A friend of mine was having afterschool sex on a regular basis with this nice looking little second year english teacher. MY english teacher had her boyfriend sit in on class sometimes for some reason. One day he proceeded to explain to a few of the guys some of their more adventurous sexual experiences together. An economics teacher got fired for supplying students with alcohol at a study meeting at his house.....a buddy of mine supplied him with his weed. A guy in my homeroom was expelled permanently after they found 28 hits of acid in his truck. Another guy got expelled for trying to sell a quarter bag of pot in his science class, after he THOUGHT the teacher had left the room. A dude in my 10th grade history class got suspended for giving a girl oral sex in the parking lot.

I'm not kidding at all either. To make it even worse my highschool was considered the "preppy" one of the three in the county, where most of the students came from nice neighborhoods.

 

[currupt4130]

ok, take that and spread it over the entire year and divide it by the number of students in your school. that is about the population outside of highschools that do the exact same thing in the "real world". i have jeep buddys, who sad to say, are 40 and still smoking pot, i dont condone it, i dont put myself around it, but its there in all walks of life. i can name countless incidents just like you can junkpile but point is this. to not be exposed to everything is to not know as much as you can. and when you dont know all you can about something your ignorant about it. and when your ignorant about the problems in the world you cant fix them. and isnt that what needs to be done? dont we need to work towards constructive solutions to the problems rather than sheltering the up and coming generation from them while they get worse?

 

[mingez]

Here's what can happen to your kids if you place them into one of those (gasp) scary public schools:

Tell your kids to steer clear of "Bullies" like Sully. :lol: