Click to Translate to English Click to Translate to French  Click to Translate to Spanish  Click to Translate to German  Click to Translate to Italian  Click to Translate to Japanese  Click to Translate to Chinese Simplified  Click to Translate to Korean  Click to Translate to Arabic  Click to Translate to Russian  Click to Translate to Portuguese


Forum Home Forum Home > General Discussion > General Discussion
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Obama reelected in 2012
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Welcome to the Avian Flu Talk Forums -- Select a topic below and join the discussion!

Obama reelected in 2012

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789 12>
Author
Message
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 7:01am
Originally posted by Verboten! Verboten! wrote:

This may come as a surprise to you, but the President does not write the laws. If Obama disagrees with crap that Republiscams and Conservative Democrats (also corrupt) put into the bill, he does not have to sign it or encourage its passing. I never voted for Obama and never will, but he is 100 percent correct in his action.

That to me is very simple to understand.



It is simple to understand that the president does not write the laws, and that he does not have to sign them if he disagrees with them. I know this. So why would President Obama sign the biggest freedom robbing bill into law if he disagreed with it? Obama "said" he did not like the parts of the National Defense Authorization Act that would allow the US military to hold US citizens indefinitely, without trial, and without representation. If you don't believe me ask the ACLU. This is a huge change to our freedom in this country just like the Patriot Act was, but much, much worse. I'm not defending Bush here either, just the scale of treachery that was signed into law that seems to get worse with each president. Something like this really requires an amendment to the Constitution and public debate so the American public can really understand it if its needed, but that's why it was signed in a closed session. The Constitution says that our military is never to be used against the citizenry. That fact probably was a bitter pill to swallow I'm sorry, but it is the truth. I urge you to get in touch with the ACLU on this issue and check it yourself!

I noticed how you conveniently left in my Patriot Act reference about Bush, but neglected to include my mention of this horrible work of trash done to the American public, by Obama when you quoted me a second time. That is just like a Liberal to leave out key parts of a statement, but if it was an accident I'll accept your apology.

Both of these are real acts of treason against us all.

There was nothing in the Employee Free Choice Act that Obama disagreed with in public when he spoke to the unions who forked over millions to support him. He let it languish without demanding it to be brought to him for his signature from a congress controlled by Democrats as one of his campaign promises.


Total Maximum Bolshoi.  There was no freedom robbing.  In fact that aspect of the law was meaningless in that it only stated what we knew to be legally true for the past two hundred plus years.

In the United States we have always allowed presidential power in times of crisis or even in times of peace to issue decrees.  The presidents have issued hundreds of them. In fact, the first order after taking the oath of office is to order that all decrees in force as signed by the outgoing President are still in force and will only be repealed at a later time as deemed necessary. Just to be safe, though, the President usually sits at the Oval Office and signs all of the decrees that he wants to continue in force on the day after he has been sworn in (if he does not have a hangover like Grant had).

The greatest one that never was really issued, was dramatized in a short novel about "The Man Without A Country, who because of an utterance "Damn the United States......that he wished he had never heard of the United States!" at his trial for treason along with Aaron Burr was sentenced to be kept out at sea permanently for the rest of his life. So he was transferred from US Naval ship to US Naval ship to US Naval ship while out at sea and was never allowed to see the United States again but was not allowed to go to any other country, either.

Presidents have the ability to order anybody who commits an act of treason or insurrection against the United States incarcerated. This power of the Executive Branch of government has been carried out by lower ranking military officers and sheriffs for well over two centuries now.  Obviously, Congress has not bothered to interfere with that power, but has instead decided to codify it and make it official in times of Crisis. The President has never needed that law and it makes no impact on his traditional Presidental Powers and if he is smart, he will never refer to it..

When I asked Senator Diane Feinstein a Democrat and Congressman Bian Bilbray a Republiscam why this silly law was passed, I was informed that Congress did not want that presidential power to be questioned in times of riot and civil insurrection. Mind you we have precedent for that Executive branch of power whenever a local military officer declares a state of Martial Law and gives shoot to kill orders or a Federally authorized  Law Man shoots to kill or authorizes shoot to kill orders to his men..

Damn wooosie pinky liberals want to take Presidential decree and martial law away and put this country at risk in times of crisis. Bush would have sent American terrorists to Guantanamo in a second if there was a major problem. Remember, when those Federal Marshals in the west and military officers up to the present day issued orders to terminate a human life they did so under Executive Office authority.

I do not think that Congress needed to pass that law as it was not necessary, but there were other items in it that needed to be codified.

Always remember this government works on Checks and Balances.  The Courts (and eventually the Supreme Court) could invalidate any law that they see as in violation of the Constitution. The Supreme Court refuses to get into the area of Presidential Power when it comes to national defense. (Very Wise, by the way.) By their action, they have proven that Presidential Decree for National Security outweighs Civil Liberties ("Shoot to Kill" or "Wanted Dead or Alive" in our Western Territories before they became states.) Now that it is Law, the SC may very well issue an opinion about it. I do not like the precedent that the new law establishes because it weakens traditional Executive Power and says Congress has some say over the issue. I hope that future presidents will not cite the Law in their incarceration of any treasonous American citizens. IF the POTUS just issues a decree, the Supreme Court will probably not question it as befits two hundred years of American Tradition in our Balance of Power system.






< id="gwProxy" ="">< jscode="leoInternalChangeDone" ="ifofjsCall==''jsCall;elsesetTimeout'jsCall',500;" id="jsProxy" ="">
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 8:19am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

Originally posted by Joe Neubarth Joe Neubarth wrote:


Just more and more and more nonsense from you mouse.  Have you ever posted anything in your life that was actually  true?  Vet your sources before you post totally mindless drivel like the silly stuff above.Obama can not and has not done anything that was in violation of the Constitution or he would have been impeached. He is sworn to protect and defend the Constitution. He has done that in fantastic fashion.Bush should have been impeached for all of his conniving with the corrupt Republiscam Bankers.  Bush and his corrupt banker friends need to be tried for treason and dealt with accordingly.


So, you mean to tell me Obama doesn't have corrupt banker friends? What about his go to man John Corzine, the former CEO of Goldman Sachs! But, because John Corzine is chummy with Obama, he's not corrupt now.
Joe Biden calls Jon Corzine for Advice Again
www.youtube.com/watch?v=buRO9TSlScQ

He hasn't done anything to violate the Constitution, really! How about the NDAA he just signed into law, even though he really didn't agree with the law he had no problem signing it! And, claims he won't use it against the American people without due process.

I know, I know Judge Napolitano is a lunatic, and because he's on Fox News he should be beheaded, or at the very least sent of to Gitmo!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VEQbtzMzxA

Your Jedi Mind Tricks won't work on me with Obama, but nice try. I can envision you now waving your hand at the computer monitor with a tightened sphincter, Ron Paul's a lunatic, move along nothing to see here. Obama's a genius, don't ask silly questions! HaHaHa.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=bJiqrVWLfdw&feature=related


I wasn't going to answer this, but I will do it just to keep you happy, mouse.

The NDAA does not give the POTUS any power that he does not already have and has had for over 200 years.  It is just Congress saying that they should have a say in that process.  Now, knowing that we will have massive waves of civil insurrection in the coming years (I'll tell you why later.) Congress wants to make it legal so that the issue can not come up in an impeachment petition. That benefits both parties regardless of who is the POTUS.  As previously stated, the President will issue decrees and never refer to the Law other than to use the Law, as passed, to prevent impeachment, if necessary.

Sadly we saw that the impeachment process can be used to try to embarrass the President because he was receiving Jewish Blow Jobs in his office. That was one of the most disgusting episodes in American Political history (That has many politically disgusting episodes in it.).

It is and always has been understood that a gentleman will not talk about or confirm any of his dalliances with women in any public manner (A tradition that has been carried forth for centuries by great men both good and evil.) It is culturally understood that a gentleman will prevaricate or obfuscate any attempt to expose a woman as having had a sexual tryst with that man. Bill Clinton the object of the attack did what he was required to do in our culture and NEVER should have been asked questions about his or her sex life.  (Das ist Verboten! Culturally that is totally unacceptable and disgraced the Republican party for all eternity, but they have no conscience, so what else is new?)

The fear that inspired the Law was that something that disgraceful could happen again (The impeachment! NOT the Blow Job)  since we have so many legislators who have no ethics or sense of moral decency as regards our culture.  Granted, we could change our culture, but we should not use impeachment of the POTUS to do so. That was so unbelievably wrong!!!!

I point out the burial of the Great President of France Francois Mitterand who was given a State Funeral. Behind his coffin as it was carried down the streets walked both his wife and mistress and his legitimate and illegitimate children. They all stood by his coffin as it was laid into the ground. Photos were taken http://iconicphotos.wordpress.com/2009/10/16/mitterands-funeral/ and the newspapers made little reference to it. The French have their act together.  A man's relationships with his lovers or wives should not be open to discussion in the political arena.  Damn the Republiscam party for what they tried to do. That act was so totally, totally, totally disgraceful.

As regards your other comments, I do not believe that Obama is a genius. Jefferson was a genius. Clinton was a Genius. I can think of no others with the possible exception of Wilson in his prime as a young man.

Obama is sort of smart and has a good understanding of ethics, though he is not really religious. In comparison, Dubya had absolutely no understanding of ethics but pretended to be religious. Bush was easily the most unethical and morally corrupt man we have ever had in elective office. I still say we need to try him for treason. He and his corrupt and unethical Banker Buddies ripped off the entire nation over the 8 years of his administration. He makes the corrupt Harding and Grant administrations look almost puritanical.

I do not like Big Bankers.  Their god is MONEY! Yet, the reality is that you have to deal with them. YOU need advice from them to be able to run the country since it takes money to run the government.

Obama deals with Big Bankers, since he has no choice.  He respects them because of their power and their capacity to get things done, but he does not worship them like Bush did. Yet, he still has to go to them for advice. Obama fears Bernanke.  I look into the presidents' eyes when they are in conference with other powerful men.  I see Fear in Obama's eyes every time he is with Bernanke. He knows that Ben can make him or break him in a second. Ben knows it, too, but is running the FED solely for the benefit of the United States  as it says in the Fed Charter. That is the reason why all of that profit money is given to the United States Treasury at the end of the year by the Fed. The Fed actually makes money for the United States and has done so for nearly a hundred years.

Obama does not seem to fear the lesser bankers but he still needs to have one or two in his confidence, so YES an argument can be made that Obama has "dealings" with several Big Bankers (Disgusting sh!ts though they may be!).  I do not like dirty and greasy car motors, but I still get under them and change my own oil every few months. Afterwards, I carefully wash and wash and wash my hands of the dirt and greasy feeling that is on them. I am certain Obama does, too.


Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 9:30am
You don't like Big Bankers, but you support the Federal Reserve? Who do you think runs the Federal Reserve?

The Creature From Jekyll Island (by G. Edward Griffin)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu_VqX6J93k
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 10:07am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

You don't like Big Bankers, but you support the Federal Reserve? Who do you think runs the Federal Reserve?

The Creature From Jekyll Island (by G. Edward Griffin)
www.youtube.com/watch?v=lu_VqX6J93k


I do not like Big Bankers.  I do not like needles in my arm or buttocks, either, but I put up with them for health reasons.  The Fed keeps the United States healthy, even though we have to use intelligent bankers to run it. 

The Federal Reserve is the greatest thing that this country has going for it. We are the greatest country on Earth simply because we have set up the Federal Reserve the way it is structured. Nobody else has the Fed, and they are all going bankrupt because of it. Notice how Europe is asking the Fed to help them out now.

The Fed Charter says they serve us. If I were president and they ever decided that they were no longer required to turn over all of their profit to the US Treasury, you could be damn well certain that I would issue a presidential decree to have them shot, and then replace them with men (or women) who fully understood their Charter.

They were created to serve the United States.

You know, I hope, that the Fed has the power to bankrupt every other country on Earth if we want to ask them to do that?  They are here to serve us and only us until Hell Freezes over. Reagan did not cause the breakup of the Soviet Union. The Fed did.  If you understood more of how they work, I would explain to you how they did it. 
Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 10:45am
Maybe there was something more to those Jewish Blow Jobs in his office?

DID THE MOSSAD BUG MONICA (HONEY TRAP) LEWINSKY'S PHONE?
whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/mossadbug.html
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 11:59am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

Maybe there was something more to those Jewish Blow Jobs in his office?

DID THE MOSSAD BUG MONICA (HONEY TRAP) LEWINSKY'S PHONE?
whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/mossadbug.html


I do not think so.  I have worked with the Mossad and Aman before.  Monica tried to keep her involvement with Clinton covered up, because she was seriously emotionally tied to him and seriously depressed that it was a relationship that could have no future. She only talked publicly when forced to do so under oath. 

After that, she realized that there was money to be made in a confession that was written for publication.  Obviously, she was a little slow on the uptake and was not as bright as her college transcripts would indicate.

If you knew you could make a million dollars by giving the President a Hummer (Navy slang from the old days) would you do it?
Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 2:53pm
Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 22 2012 at 7:41pm
I don't know Joe? I think we should just agree to disagree about Obama! I'm not a Liberal, but I am a libertarian, meaning I feel any American over the age of 18 should have the right to do whatever they want as long as I doesn't harm someone else's person or property. In this country people should have the right to fail or succeed by the choices they make, but it shouldn't be at my expense. Having said that, all education should be free to all students that make the effort to succeed, and low interest loans and tax breaks given to venture capitalist to help stimulate job growth.
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 23 2012 at 7:24am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

I don't know Joe? I think we should just agree to disagree about Obama! I'm not a Liberal, but I am a libertarian, meaning I feel any American over the age of 18 should have the right to do whatever they want as long as I doesn't harm someone else's person or property. In this country people should have the right to fail or succeed by the choices they make, but it shouldn't be at my expense. Having said that, all education should be free to all students that make the effort to succeed, and low interest loans and tax breaks given to venture capitalist to help stimulate job growth.


You obviously have not read my earlier posts when we set up my plan to post as a Liberal simply because I did not see any Liberals defending the Liberal perspective. I asked the board owner if we could do this in advance as it might actually bring people back to the board. I see a slight increase in posting, but I do not know if it is bringing any old timers back, which was the intent. If they were the least bit disposed to argue politics in a Presidential election year while wanting at the same time to keep up to date on Avian Flu, they could come back here. At the very least we could then direct them to the 2012 Forum.

I am not a liberal, not even close. 

I do have liberal friends just like I have conservative friends. All of my strong conservative friends are money grubbers. All are Republicans, the obvious party of the wealthy. They worship money. They love to show people what money has done in their lives (Expensive cars, Expensive Houses, Trophy Wives, Expensive Medical Care, Cosmetic Medical Care, Vast Portfolios......).

Since that is their religion, I just accept that they have a weird religion and avoid their proselytizing conversations about money and what it can buy, and casually turn the subject to other things. Since most of the money worshipers are also Gold worshipers, I do not talk about that either. You can still be friendly if you avoid talking about and disparaging their gods. Funny how so many of the Conservative Republicans always say that they are Christians, as if Christians and accumulated wealth are made for each other. Was that part of the message of Jesus?

I have three lifelong friends who now claim to be Libertarians. Now, I like them all and I think they are wonderful people with only minor flaws which are as follows:

1.      They have not realized that without government this world would be a hell of a place to live.

2.      Like Republican Conservatives, they all worship money, but not as seriously.

3.      Unlike most Conservative Republicans they usually do not have wealth or are at risk of losing what small nest eggs they have or are building up and usually feel that government is a threat to that security.

4.      They are not broadly educated, but pontificate as if they were.

Let me say this about that. A large percentage of mankind is loving and kind and giving, but there is a substantial percentage that is self serving, hateful of others, potentially dishonest and potentially violent if they find it is to their advantage. Just like Hitler, the right conditions have to come together for them to show their true inner nature. Hitler was an introvert and confused deep thinker who when granted power became a vicious beast who preyed upon the weak. I roughly figure that the predators make up about twenty percent of our population. You can’t really count them until they self identify by their behavior, and sometimes they never see the right conditions that would make them act violent or criminal.

With laws, predators can be controlled, just like if Hitler was not given a pulpit to preach from, he never would have been able to do the things that he did. Without laws predators would eat up the more compassionate kinder people of the world. Those kinder and compassionate people need a legal structure to keep them safe from the predators.

It is in the DNA of the predators to be the way they are, just like it is in the DNA of the kind people to be the way they are. The same thing is seen in the animal kingdom. On Sixty Minutes last night they were interviewing the young lady who lived among and studied Chimpanzees most of her life.  She had become famous for her observations of their behavior and was the first to report to the world that chimps used tools just like early man. She also noted that some chimps were prone to violence while others were very passive and peaceful and loving. One violent chimp actually attacked her several times and tried to kill her with blows to her body and head and also by trying to throw her off of a cliff. That Chimp had a close relative that was very much the same. Those violent chimps actually kill other chimps in violent outbursts that was filmed. They have those DNA programmed predators in their society, too, as sad as it may seem.

If you self identifying Libertarians actually got far less government as you frequently wish, you better hope that your wish does not come true or the predators will eat you.

So, where do I stand? I am the exact opposite of a Libertarian.  I like them.  All of them that I know like me. That is probably because I believe in decriminalizing Marijuana. Just to give them fair warning, I also believe in making drunken (impaired) driving laws far more severe, so if people want to smoke their pot in the privacy of their homes, they better not try to operate a motor vehicle on the open roads while intoxicated.

I see most libertarians as not fully educated idealists who have not seen the ugliest aspects of human behavior. I have seen it all first hand and know better. Study or observe crime close up and you will know why we need police forces and the military to protect us.  It isn't because there are just bad people out there, it is because there are totally evil people out there. Heaven help the entire world if they become a world leader like Hitler or Stalin or Mao Tse Tung or the terror happy Ayatollas in Iran.

I am a proponent for totally reforming the Constitution to put more teeth into the justice system.  We need to reform our court systems and bring back hanging and firing squads as identified legal means of execution. I believe in getting rid of criminal refuse in an efficient manner without tender loving kindness extended to the murderers and rapists and violent pedophiles.

I believe in the death penalty for all serious crime. Under changes I would like to see, those corrupt bankers would not be around anymore. They are predators who had the opportunity and self identified by their wanton and ugly criminal behavior. They are running free because our courts do not know how to charge them and probably could not convict them with a jury of their peers hearing the case. Our juror system is extremely expensive in work hours wasted and money spent on witnesses.  Overall the system is horribly under productive.

We need to do away with stupid large juries that do not have the education to even understand the crimes that have been committed. You wonder why almost none of the corrupt greedy bankers who brought this severe recession upon the world are behind bars. Simple, it would be almost impossible for a jury of our (usually uneducated) peers to understand the nature of the criminality committed by the bankers.  Our justice system drastically needs structural reform, but no Presidential Candidate is offering that as a solution to the problem.

We need to hold all trials before three judges who are experts in their field. Thus three judges who have studied economics and banking would be the trial judges and juries. Since they would be hired from society, they would still qualify as a jury of our peers. The partial exception being that they would be our EDUCATED PEERS. There is nothing wrong with having educated people who understand the issues in a position to judge if a criminal act took place. Consider having judges who were experts at forensic evidence. Trials could be over in a matter of minutes instead of weeks spent trying to educate the jury about science and medicine.

To my way of thinking, I see the Democratic Party as just as corrupt as the Republican Party and would like to see laws repudiating their outrageous and open corruption and money grubbing techniques. Almost all politicians regardless of party affiliation are on the take simply because they need money to run their reelection campaigns.

That could very easily be done away with by giving politicians free airtime (on both radio and television) to tell the public about their positions and platforms and goals for America, but not one dollar would be spent on television commercials (Damn, they are so totally annoying!).

Anybody caught trying to bribe a legislator, or judge or executive (City, County, State, or Federal) or any legislator or judge or executive caught taking a bribe would be tried before a three judge jury of their peers and promptly executed by firing squad, hanging or lethal injection (Whatever they ask for, either in person or by the nature of their criminality).  You would quickly see money move out of  bribing politics and integrity return. Our legislators would be men and women of integrity and you would not see so many of the predator like people in elective office.  Meanwhile we would gradually be eliminating them from society, because they always self identify.

Again, I am not a liberal, though I understand how tremendously valuable the Federal Reserve System is to America.  As I have posted in earlier posts I do not like either political party and I do not like a Constitution that allows such open criminality all across the land in defiance of the common good and common sense of the eighty percent of the people who are mild, loving and kind.  I suspect that Libertarians would categorize my position is fascist. Unlike Libertarians, I believe in a strong and totally efficient justice system.

Now, the Democrats and a few Republicans voting with them have supposedly tightened up the Banking Laws to prevent the tremendous abuses of the corrupt Bush Presidency. Changing the law after the fact still does not take away from the horrible Raping of America that those bankers managed to get away with scot-free. If we were to revise the Constitution, I would put an Ex-Post-Facto provision in that would allow the government to try those predatory crooks for the crimes they committed against America. That means we would clearly redefine the crime and try those Bush era sons of bitches under the new definition of the law.

I do not believe in "Change that we can believe in."

I believe in practical but strong change that can bring definite and positive results.

Sadly, that 80 percent of the populace that are mild and loving and kind people are afraid of strong change, so they will continue to be victims of the predators in society. The kind people always set themselves up and then wonder why they were victimized. Predators always prey upon the weak because the weak are always available to be eaten.

We have got to put a stop to that.

 



Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 23 2012 at 10:23am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

. ...In this country people should have the right to fail or succeed by the choices they make, but it shouldn't be at my expense. Having said that, all education should be free to all students that make the effort to succeed, and low interest loans and tax breaks given to venture capitalist to help stimulate job growth.


In actuality your goal for education ("but it shouldn't be at my expense.") would be very expensive and horribly wasteful.

                EDUCATIONAL REFORM IS NEEDED IN AMERICAS SCHOOLS

I am a firm believer that we need to drastically reform our education system in America.  In my system we would have five grades of elementary school and five grades of high school.  At the end of fifth grade all students would be tested for mental functioning and educational subject attainment, and those who would not be capable of progressing to a college prep track would be sent to a vocational high school where they would be prepared to work in hundreds of fields of employment that do not require deep thinking or a college degree.

Those who had the capacity for college education would go on to a college prep high school where they would receive the same education that we try to teach them now-a-days in 12 grades. After high school we would use the local junior college system for two years to fine tune the students who could still be living at home for the type of college education that they wished to pursue.  From there, they would go on to an actual four year college.

Why this two track system?  Simple the present system is holding back the top achievers and medium high achievers from a prompt quality education.  In our inner cities, the smarter kids are being victimized by the stupid ones.  We have high schools in our Big Cities that are graduating students who really do not know how to read above a third grade level if they can read at all. I have heard a great many teachers complain that we have dumbed down our educational system in order to allow dumb kids to graduate.  The falling SAT scores would seem to substantiate that as a sad reality in our society.

That is not the fault of the teachers, as the students have an average IQ below 90 and are defiant against quality education because they feel embarrassed in the classroom. In many cases if you put them in learning tracks with other poor performing students there are accusations of racism because most of the low learning track students are minorities (Black and Hispanic). Because of their alienation from education they do not even get a fifth grade understanding of the subjects and they actually interfere with the education of those similar lower IQ students who are motivated to learn. So the prudent solution is to send them to a vocational school where they can learn a skill that will help them provide an income for the rest of their lives.

Pretending that all students are capable of college level work is silly and extremely wasteful (of taxpayers dollars). We could save a lot of money by only educating kids for college who are capable of benefiting from a college education. We could take some of that saved money and put it into building quality vocational schools.

The natural question arises, but what if a kid just did poorly on the battery of tests that determine which type of high school they could go to?  The answer is simple, if the parent's ask, they can be tested a second time, and given an opportunity to cross over from the vocational school to college prep school for the first two years of their educational progression. If they have not proven that they can read at a fifth grade level and do math at a fifth grade level by seventh grade it is time to admit the obvious, ("They are just not college prep material.") Conversely, if a student in the college prep track can not keep up with the curriculum, that student can be placed in a vocational school if the parents or guardians ask.

We should not be trying to push a square peg into a round hole. It is fairly simple, if they do not fit, find the right placement for them and educate them accordingly.



Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 23 2012 at 2:08pm
Your education plan sounds good Joe, just have to get it past the teacher's union! I like the idea of a voucher system where the parents could choose a charter school or private school that fits their child's personality, interests, and abilities.


RSA Animate - Changing Education Paradigms
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 23 2012 at 8:32pm
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

Your education plan sounds good Joe, just have to get it past the teacher's union! I like the idea of a voucher system where the parents could choose a charter school or private school that fits their child's personality, interests, and abilities.


RSA Animate - Changing Education Paradigms
www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U&feature=youtube_gdata_player


You and I agree on the voucher system. Considering all that I had posted already I decided not to mention it.  My wife and I home schooled our children. Those that wanted to enter public high school were allowed to do so.  One of my sons was captain of four sports teams his senior year in high school, so for him high school was a big thing. Two daughters did not want to go to high school and entered Junior college at age 15, having completed high school with top honors and straight A averages.  One of those two daughters worked at K-Mart for high school work study, and was able to buy her first car totally brand new with cash while she was still 15. Both daughters continued  doing the same thing in college. One adopted Korean son was not mentally sharp so we home schooled him through high school.  Not college material, he has done very well in his job since high school. Two other sons and one daughter went through high school. The ones that opted for high school at home by far and away were the best students in college.

The issue there is parental involvement. If the parents participate in the learning process the value of education is taught to the kids and they pick up on it and treat education with respect.

For kids who are not hard as nails, public high school can be traumatizing because of all of the low IQ males who cause trouble in classes and create a bad atmosphere at the school.
The trouble makers are usually students who are in the process of deciding that they do not need high school.  Almost all of them have arrest records in their teens or early twenties. It is a mess Royale that our public schools have created.
Back to Top
Elver View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member
Avatar

Joined: June 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 858
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Elver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: January 23 2012 at 10:38pm
When I lived back east I interviewed several people for a clerical position.  I needed someone who could add & subtract in their heads in order to put inventory data into a computer.  I asked all 4 candidates, 2 white & 2 black, if they could tell me what 17 from 63 was.  The two white ladies had to think for a moment & came up with the right answer.  The two black girls, both of whom supposedly graduated from high school, could not tell me.  I then told them in their separate interviews that perhaps they were just nervous & to do the subtraction on paper.  Neither one could do it.  I suppose after all these years they felt I discriminated against them.  I wonder how it is that they could get through high school & not even know second grade math!
 
My husband's cousin is a 6th grade teacher & she is dumber than a rock!  Could this be part of the problem?
Elver
Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 15 2012 at 6:02pm
Our apathy is killing us!

Rampant Voter Fraud In Maine! (MUST SEE) Share This!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXZt_nrQsvg&feature=youtube_gdata_player
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2012 at 8:46am
Originally posted by mrmouse mrmouse wrote:

Our apathy is killing us!

Rampant Voter Fraud In Maine! (MUST SEE) Share This!
www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXZt_nrQsvg&feature=youtube_gdata_player




That is just a little manipulation for the benefit of the Grand Old Party. Remember the party hierarchy do not consider Paul to be a real candidate, so they momentarily invalidate votes for him.  This is not abnormal behavior as it has been normal on the local level for generations.  We have seen it many times in past primaries and caucuses.

Don't worry, Romney was predesignated to win and unless upper leadership in the GOP decides else-wise, that is how it will be.  It looks like Upper Leadership is presently divided between Santorum and Romney.  We will see who wins between those two in the weeks ahead.  I doubt that either has a true majority with the Political King Makers.  That is where the real decision is to be made, not in the primaries.





< id="gwProxy" ="">< jscode="leoInternalChangeDone" ="ifofjsCall==''jsCall;elsesetTimeout'jsCall',500;" id="jsProxy" ="">
Total truth at all times. Why do people have problems with the truth?
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 16 2012 at 9:22am
Originally posted by Elver Elver wrote:

When I lived back east I interviewed several people for a clerical position.  I needed someone who could add & subtract in their heads in order to put inventory data into a computer.  I asked all 4 candidates, 2 white & 2 black, if they could tell me what 17 from 63 was.  The two white ladies had to think for a moment & came up with the right answer.  The two black girls, both of whom supposedly graduated from high school, could not tell me.  I then told them in their separate interviews that perhaps they were just nervous & to do the subtraction on paper.  Neither one could do it.  I suppose after all these years they felt I discriminated against them.  I wonder how it is that they could get through high school & not even know second grade math!
 
My husband's cousin is a 6th grade teacher & she is dumber than a rock!  Could this be part of the problem?




All my Republican friends tell me the same kind of stories.  I was in management for many years at AT&T (SBC) as I was hired directly out of the Navy for that purpose. I closed contracts with the Union and settled many grievances that the Union had of long standing.

When it came to interviewing candidates for a technical job, I never interviewed a minority who was dumb. Blacks, Hispanics, northern Europeans were all the same when it came to technical performance. 

There was one exception and that was related to quality of education. The sharpest people I interviewed were fresh out of University in India. Their technical schools in Mumbai were putting out top of the line technicians.  It was my recommendation to AT&T that they hire the top two or three graduates from those technical schools for Information Technology jobs in the US, and that is what they did. We called it the Green Card invasion. The graduates from our technical schools in the United States did not measure up in any way shape or form.  Hence most of our highly technical schools are failing their students. Georgia Tech is a total failure when it comes to IT graduates. Ditto Virginia Tech. 


A large number of the higher technical management jobs at AT&T are now held by Indians.



< id="gwProxy" ="">< jscode="leoInternalChangeDone" ="ifofjsCall==''jsCall;elsesetTimeout'jsCall',500;" id="jsProxy" ="">
Total truth at all times. Why do people have problems with the truth?
Back to Top
Joe Neubarth View Drop Down
Senior Advisor
Senior Advisor
Avatar

Joined: April 18 2010
Location: San Diego
Status: Offline
Points: 375
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Joe Neubarth Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 17 2012 at 7:50am
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=suJCvkazrTc&feature=player_embedded#!







< id="gwProxy" ="">< jscode="leoInternalChangeDone" ="ifofjsCall==''jsCall;elsesetTimeout'jsCall',500;" id="jsProxy" ="">
Total truth at all times. Why do people have problems with the truth?
Back to Top
mrmouse View Drop Down
V.I.P. Member
V.I.P. Member


Joined: April 24 2009
Status: Offline
Points: 705
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote mrmouse Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 21 2012 at 1:54pm
Amen!

The 5-Minute Speech that Got Judge Napolitano Fired from Fox News
www.washingtonsblog.com/2012/02/the-5-minute-speech-which-got-judge-napolitano-fired-from-fox-news.html
Back to Top
FluMom View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group


Joined: February 11 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 2991
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote FluMom Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 21 2012 at 4:29pm
WOW, great speach! Did Napolitano really get fired. I just don't pay attention to that kind of stuff.
Always Be Prepared
Back to Top
Mahshadin View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: January 26 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2627
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mahshadin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: February 21 2012 at 5:21pm
Ya you cant be dissing the Right on the GOP Channel (Your Gone)
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act."   G Orwell
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 56789 12>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down