Jump to content

Apparently I am a "bad person", too.


Recommended Posts

Read this(Just read it, and don't whine and then quit reading it. The last paragraph is priceless.): http://www.slate.com...to_private.html

 

Then read this commentary about it: http://www.popehat.c...m-a-bad-person/

 

My favorite part from the second:

In other words, Benedikt thinks her education did her no harm. I leave the response to that as an exercise for the reader. ( :lol:) I will note that some elementary logic classes might have helped her( :lol: :lol:): if bad education is not so bad, why is it terrible that it persists, and why does its persistence act as a moral imperative for people to eschew the best interests of their children?

This guy would fit right in here.

 

Well, I have no kids, so, I am probably a "good person" in the eyes of the dealth cult that is the so-called "progressive" movement.

 

However, once again, the hilarity of their lack of logic is on display.

 

The original writer talks about Liberal guilt? Hey clown: how about you start feeling guilty for 50 years of FAIL forced upon an unsuspecting educational system, that is certainly worse than when you found it?

 

That guilt is much more appropriate.

 

I also like how the commenter describes himself, of course, because that's probably right around where I am, on most things.

 

I do want to see $ attached to kids, not schools, which means that money follows the kid if he changes schools. And, I do want to see mandatory fines/imprisonment/community service for parents who either don't support their child, or, don't send that child to school, prepared to learn, every single day. Prepared to learn = fed, clean, not itching from bed bugs, not wearing unwashed clothes. I also want to see a mandatory program created that says if you are on assistance, and you get pregnant again, out of wedlock? Immediate, life-altering consequences follow. It's time to knock back this LBJ, psedo-feminist, "have as many babies as you want" nonsense once and for all.

 

IF that crosses the line of "liberty" so be it. The only reason this is happening is the phony, government generated-liberty that says "I can have as many kids as I want, and the rest of you have to pay for it". So, if you think about it, all we are really doing is removing artificial liberty, not the real thing, with that policy.

 

It comes down to this: Liberals? I don't want to participate in your failure. Nobody else does either, not even other liberals. The fact that you think you can guilt us into supporting stupid? That tells us all we need to know about the value of your ideas.

Edited by OCinBuffalo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't get past the second sentence of the second paragraph:

 

"But it seems to me that if every single parent sent every single child to public school, public schools would improve."

 

Yeah...how's that work again? Educational resources scale in direct proportion to child participation? The more kids you enroll, the more property taxes you collect?

 

Moron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I a say thread called Apparently I am a "bad person", too. with the last poster DC Tom.

And here I thought it was his confession :rolleyes:

 

But then i read the linked article and quickly realized it was written by an idiot™, a !@#$ing moron™, and a !@#$ing Wednesday.

 

Anybody that does not do whatever they can do for the benefit of their offspring, because it's not fair to other children, has their head so far up their ass that they call a dentist for an eye exam

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I a say thread called Apparently I am a "bad person", too. with the last poster DC Tom.

And here I thought it was his confession :rolleyes:

 

But then i read the linked article and quickly realized it was written by an idiot™, a !@#$ing moron™, and a !@#$ing Wednesday.

 

Anybody that does not do whatever they can do for the benefit of their offspring, because it's not fair to other children, has their head so far up their ass that they call a dentist for an eye exam

 

That dentist would have to be named Mandelbrot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't get past the second sentence of the second paragraph:

 

"But it seems to me that if every single parent sent every single child to public school, public schools would improve."

 

Yeah...how's that work again? Educational resources scale in direct proportion to child participation? The more kids you enroll, the more property taxes you collect?

 

Moron.

 

The author was arguing that if everyone put their kids in public schools, everyone would realize how bad they are and consequently be invested enough to finally begin the process of fixing it over the course of three or four generations so that one day public schools could hopefully be as good as private schools are today.

 

But yes. Moron.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The author was arguing that if everyone put their kids in public schools, everyone would realize how bad they are and consequently be invested enough to finally begin the process of fixing it over the course of three or four generations so that one day public schools could hopefully be as good as private schools are today.

 

But yes. Moron.

Because when every child attends public school, public schools will somehow have incentive to improve for some reason. When competition is eliminated, things always get better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Because when every child attends public school, public schools will somehow have incentive to improve for some reason. When competition is eliminated, things always get better.

 

There's a solid 10,000 years or so of human history to support the bolded statement.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there's anything leftist control of the media and academia knows how to do, it's re-write history

 

Re-writing history is the fastest way to get people to forget what Republicans really meant to slavery.

 

One of my favorite Twitter comments from photos at Obama's MLK speech -- with him and Biden and Carter and other Dems standing in front of the Lincoln Memorial -- had to do with the fact that the only Republican in the photo was invited because he couldn't speak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...