How will students learn about Evolution and theories on the origin of life?
despite it's controversy, evolution is still the closest to accurate theory on life.
And what creates the truly smart children is the ability and passion to debate such issues. Religious fanatics shouldn't be suing teachers just because they say that Evolution is a valid theory. As long as they don't say that God doesn't exist or shit like that.
I don't think libertarianism is the best mentality. only in certain situations. economically, I'm more of a Corporate Capitalist (which is definitely not Libertarian).
and even so, presenting what a random economist had to say doesn't do much.
i actually agree that middle class deserve more tax cuts than the higher class, but this is because I want more spending for the things Reagan actually DID spend taxes on. I just want to spend even more on it. So that money has to come from the rich. but to improve the economy, the Middle Class need more tax breaks.
In order to have a good credit America has to have a certain amount of debt. I don't know enough about Reagan's spending, though, in order to know if he did it efficiently, though. But debt is good.
But, less government spending is usually good (although, I believe in big government spending for science, education and military).
O RLY? an economist said something about how tax cuts are bad?
let me mention another economist who says that not only are tax cuts good, but Laissez Faire capitalism is the best. In fact, he's one of the most prestige and well known economists of all time. Adam Smith.
Paul Krugman is openly liberal and believes that liberal mentality is the only right mentality. Think of Rush Limbaugh, but as a liberal... you'd get Paul Krugman (with a radio show).
I don't mind what you have to say (slam Reaganomics) but the way you did it was kind of... eh. Like I said, economists all have different views on the economy. We should look more to experience. Reagan's era was a great one for the market. It's possible that he just got lucky, and anyone can argue that forever, but to say that certain economists are against tax cuts makes Reaganomics wrong just kind of ruins the whole debate.
actually, the argument came from scientists with PhDs and Nobel Prizes. And a shit load of them as well.
I know, I don't have the list. Sparsely had it, and I guess I should have bookmarked it, but I didn't...
So i'm left at your mercy to remember Sparsely's post from a long time ago.
no, majority of people are that fuckin' stupid.
at least in politics, politicians are stupid, yes, but they also no the importance of leadership and the POSSIBLE greater good. They know how to analyze their surroundings and use it correctly.
People, in general, or ideological morons. I know, it pains me to admit that people like Obama are not ideologues. On the other hand, those who don't like to play the game (Nader) are ideologues... but luckily they don't get voted in.
Actually, those who win do it from getting the audience (voters) on their side. Plato pointed this problem out. That the people vote for the candidate who they just "like" more (Obama) and not for the more qualified person (McCain).
Hell, even Hitler (the most brilliant politician until Obama) stressed the importance of speech giving and personality. It doesn't matter if you want to extend socialism (Universal Healthcare) while still saying that you believe in private property. As long as you can Doublthink the shit out of your audience.
Also, there's the fact that everyone hated Bush and was definitely not going to vote Republican. So no matter how good McCain could possibly be, it was a given to Obama.
That is how elections work.
But, is Obama that bad? Not really. And neither are any presidents. We see that not EVERYONE can be Reagan, Lincoln or Teddy Roosevelt, and most people would have made the same decision as the other president. In the presidency, you learn a lot of new things. This is why Obama no longer wants to pull out of Iraq just yet. He sees what Bush saw, and it's a real cluster fuck.
With a lottery, we're stuck with people who are TRUE ideologues and they'll live by their promise no matter what. Someone who actually would pull out of Iraq and fuck everything up for the military.
Yes, Obama has done some things like restrict tobacco, close Gitmo, and been apathetic to the situation in Iran, but these are little things compared to the bigger picture. In that, the bigger picture will almost be ALWAYS the same.
The Earth has gone through stages of hot and cold for billions of years now, I don't think the dawn of factories is really what's causing Global Warming. The most close to home hypothesis is that we MIGHT be speeding it up by a few years.
Now, if we are able to CUT DOWN (because we can never eliminate most carbon emissions) it still won't change the fact that most of it will be coming from other nations. So... we won't make a difference, and our lives will be much more inconvenient (refer to descriptions in article).
I do believe in alternative energy mainly because we do need to become independent. But regulating our lives for something that won't do shit is ridiculous and Authoritarian.
Paine was a deist, but he did use Christian propaganda (so did Hitler).
There's no point in having an official language in a FREE country. I think we have to start remembering that America is different from all the other countries. We shouldn't have a structure like everyone else. We're supposed to be rebellious and have limited government. It's what America was born to be. Not just another country with a "pride" in it's culture or religion. We should be proud to JUST be America. We should be proud to be free.
