bevin Posted March 26, 2006 Posted March 26, 2006 A president, like any manager, is no better than the staff he picks. But he IS responsible for picking and keeping those staff. GWB picked terrible staff, and backed them even when they had been publically proven to be incompetent and less than candid to the point of dishonesty. He is a bad manager - for picking them, for backing them, and for keeping them. /Bevin Quote
there buster Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Quote: What we need to do is say 'are the people of America better off after these 6 years?' (in absolute terms, A fanciful notion, often espoused by socialists. For in real life, no such absolutes exist. We didn't get to choose between Bush and an ideal or absolute, we had to choose between the alternatives available. Not only that, there are what economists call "secular" events, events not within the President's control, some-- like the weather, earthquakes, or sunspots-- not in anyone's control. So any comparison with "absolute" terms is just fantasy. Quote “the slovenliness of our language makes it easier to have foolish thoughts.” George Orwell
Dr. Shane Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Bush has done a fine job with the economy. His low poll numbers and deficit problems are due to Iraq. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
David Koot Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Quote: Shane said: Bush has done a fine job with the economy. I confess to having an interest in macroeconomics. Shane, how do you define 'a fine job'? My particular concern is with the burgeoning deficits. We seem to be swimming (or sinking) in a sea of red ink! This can't go on forever. Honestly, it looks to me like Keynesian economics on a global scale. Quote
Moderators lazarus Posted March 27, 2006 Author Moderators Posted March 27, 2006 Quote: Bravus said: In the final analysis, I guess what I was trying to say is that the theme of this thread is off the track. Neither Bush's likeability/charisma nor his (in)articulateness is to the point. Whats the track that we are on? I'm simply giving an impression and inviting people to respond. I hope your are not saying that his likeabilty/charisma or inabilibty to speak are irrelevant. To everyone they are relevant! That is to the point. This thread was not meant to a judgement about his presidence in general!!!!! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein
Moderators Bravus Posted March 27, 2006 Moderators Posted March 27, 2006 Laz - I guess I meant to say that they're not that important (to me at least). You don't get elected without being at least somewhat likeable, and although I personally would prefer a leader who can clearly lay out his ideas and communicate well, that's not essential. If the thread is just about those two things, then I'll politely bow out. What counts with a prsident is not that surface stuff, but the actions and the consequences. Ed D - fair enough: I think I agree that a comparison against the ideal is a fantasy without boots in the real world. But on the other hand, a comparison against an imagined Gore presidency is not much better, because it too is pretty much purely speculative. My guess is that Gore would have been better at least by the Hippocratic standard of doing less harm, but it's just a guess. That shouldn't completely disqualify anyone from critiquing the government that is governing, else such critique would *never* be legitimate. Shane - in general outline that view of vouchers sounds attractive, and I can see why you advocate it. I agree that there's work to be done in education, and that a solution like this seems plausible. But let me just point out three issues I can see with it: 1. Will the vouchers cover the total cost of private schooling? Or will parents still have to come up with some fees? If it's the latter, then the poorest will be stuck in a declining public education system, because they can't afford to supplement the vouchers out of their own pockets. If it's the former, see Point 3 below. 2. Your argument about funding following students seems logical on the surface, but (a) school funding for teachers and infrastructure is not on a per-student basis: to fund a teacher needs a certain number of students, and likewise for a custodian, school maintenance and so on. Students leave as individuals but resources leave in bigger blocks. ( if a school is already failing, and is in decline, do you think it's going to attract and retain good, committed, capable teachers? Those kids who stay in the school the longest will get a decreasing quality of education (from the eyr low level they already get.) 3. Private schools, by definition, are for-profit, and need to generate profits for their owners or shareholders. Even assuming that this does not become the *primary* goal, with associated cost-cutting and corner-cutting, the need to extract a profit means that education will be more expensive to offer than when it's offered as a non-profit community service. There will be all the costs of actually providing the education, plus a profit margin. Anyway, this is kind of off topic for this thread, but honestly, if the administration was working in ways that were actively, demonstrably helping those who need it, I would be the first to acknowledge it. But approaches need to be realistically thought through. Quote Truth is important
David Koot Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Shane, permit me to clarify my characterization of the administration's economic policy. Granting that classic Keynesian economics relies on deficit spending to stimulate the economy; and, granting that the administration seems to practice supply-side economics (which, still, are resulting in huge deficits--not good, in my opinion) I am thinking of the international scene. Reportedly, there are HUGE trade deficits. Isn't the purpose, to stimulate the global economy? But, unlike the Keynesian model, which would depend on appropriate action by the central banker, this involves other, sovereign States who are outside the control of our central bank, and are pursuing their own agendas. Seems rather irresponsible to this observer. David Koot Quote
Dr. Shane Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 If my child attends the local public school, the school will recieve $6,000 in combined funding for him being there. The local Adventist elementary school will cost me $2,000/year made in 10 payments. The local academy will cost me $4,000/year made in 10 payments. This simply shows that the private sector can educate our children cheaper than the government can. That includes the cost of janitors, secretaries, adminstrators, etc. Our school even has a shuttle that picks up kids that live in surrounding towns. Vouchers are being used in more states and more communities. I see their use to increase because they do save the taxpayer money without compromising the value of education. Charter schools are are excellent although they educate the children for the same cost and thus do not offer the savings that voucher do. On the issue of the economy and the deficit. The economy is good because it is growing at a slow and sustained rate. If it grows too slow or negetively we have problems with unemployement. If it grows too fast we have problems with inflation. Increasing fuel costs have caused inflation in some sectors but they have served to keep the reins on the economy enough to prevent overall inflation. The deficit is mostly a result of the Iraq war and anti-terrorism. When we deduct the cost of the war and homeland security the deficit shrinks significantly. Most that have favored a balanced budget ammendment have favored leaving a clause to allow deficit spending during time of war or negetive economic growth. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Moderators Bravus Posted March 27, 2006 Moderators Posted March 27, 2006 </font><blockquote><font class="small">Quote:</font><hr /> If my child attends the local public school, the school will recieve $6,000 in combined funding for him being there. The local Adventist elementary school will cost me $2,000/year made in 10 payments. The local academy will cost me $4,000/year made in 10 payments. This simply shows that the private sector can educate our children cheaper than the government can. <hr /></blockquote><font class="post"> I'm not sure about the American system, but in Australia private schools also receive some government funding, so these may not be direct comparisons, since they don't take that funding into account. I'd be interested to know. Quote Truth is important
Dr. Shane Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 David, you posted your last post when I was making mine. A major part of our trade deficit is OIL. When we remove the dollar amount we spend on forgien oil and gasoline from our trade deficit it doesn't look nearly as bad. One of our most lopsided trading partners (excluding oil) is China but we have been gaining some ground in that area over the last several years too. We live in a global economy and must compete with other countries the same way New York once had to complete with South Corlina. Tarrifs will do us more harm than good so much of our trade deficits are going to depend on the private sector much more than goverment regulations. Getting off forgien oil would help a lot which is why we should be developing fuel alternatives, drilling in Alaska and off the coasts of California and Florida. I do not like deficit spending to stimulate the economy. I understand it it but don't like it. Especially when we are already deficit spending to pay for a war. That is one area where I disagree with the President. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Dr. Shane Posted March 27, 2006 Posted March 27, 2006 Adventist elementary and secondary schools do not recieve any public money in the US. Our universities do recieve money from pell grants, student loans and GI bill that are available to the qualifiying students. The tutition rates I listed are cheaper than the national average however so is the funding to public schools. In some states public schools recieve over $10k/student. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Neil D Posted March 28, 2006 Posted March 28, 2006 Quote: Anyone with two brain cells to rub together Ok, stop right there....If you are going to talk down to people, you are aiming to have a flaming war...IF you are out to have a flaming war, you are no friend of anyone here. My advise to you is to get off the board and get a life. If you talk down to some one, you WILL BE held accountable for your attitude. There are plenty of other places where you can talk like this or worse...We aim to do better here ... whether you like it or not.... Understand, stretch? Quote: Anyone [snip] should know that polls are weighted to say what is wanted to be said. Not when polls are from non-political entities. Gallap is not interested in politics, but is interested in polls. Pew is a non-political entity, and aint intereested in politics. And when various polls from different non-political entities are all pointing in the same direction, you had better be listening...Politicians do... Quote: Actually, Neil, the American public does understand "intellectuals"...all too well. The American public, though, doesn't like being called "stupid" just because they don't agree with self-appointed "intellectuals". "Self appointed"??? Boy, you have been listening to the likes of some mean people like Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh...No, thoses activites come from the peeprs of the intellectual communitys....You know you couldn't get Bill Gates elected president because he is a geek, especially when the likes a political machine that employes the swift boaters ilk....No matter how much money he had, he couldn't get elected because someone somewhere would undermine his reputation badly.... Just like they did with each of our war heros, Kerry and McCaine... Quote: When I filter out the emotion from both sides of the aisle, I get a much more balanced perspective of what is really going on. But that's just the way my intellect works... I _thought_ you were still eating from the bowl of sugar frosted flakes. To get balance, you need 7 grain cereal for breakfast, along with some fruit... Of course, it takes some getting used to, but it is better for you.... You really ought to listen to the compassion and fairness issues of the day...Some people call it 'balance'...I call it food for thought.... Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. George Bernard Shaw
Ted Oplinger Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 Let's see, now... Quote: Not when polls are from non-political entities. Gallap is not interested in politics, but is interested in polls. Pew is a non-political entity, and aint intereested in politics. And when various polls from different non-political entities are all pointing in the same direction, you had better be listening...Politicians do... Funny how polls are suddenly so "fair" and "non-political" when they support an agreeable perspective. Trouble is, polls are no better than the target polling samples and the leading questions asked. Too often, the polls you've lauded there, Neil, have been completely wrong about how the country really feels about a specific issue. Both sides of the political aisle have taken these "non-political" polls apparently "pointing in the same direction", and found themselves askew the American public...because they trusted in the polls, not the people. The "Contract with America" back in '94 is a very good example of this happening to both sides with one issue. The Democrats used the polls on the contract issues to think there was no threat to their majorities in Legislature. Those polss all said the contract was a non-issue. They paid for it dearly. After gaining majority status, the Republicans used the polss of their support as a mandate for sweeping changes. Americans didn't support that, either, even the the polls all pointed in the same direction. I won't be using the polls to determine where I ought to stand on a particular issue...I'm not a politician. Quote: "Self appointed"??? Boy, you have been listening to the likes of some mean people like Ann Coulter, and Rush Limbaugh...No, thoses activites come from the peeprs of the intellectual communitys.... Yep, I said self-appointed. I don't give my consent to this appointment. Many PhD's think that a status "just less than God" comes with their degree, and that this gives them special priviledge to declare what proper thought ought to be. In reality, these just become intellectual bullies who can't exist in a real exchange of ideas. Ann Coulter mean? Rush Limbaugh mean? Their rhetoric is actually tame compared to what Gore, Reid, Pelosi, et. al., speak of. Yet, when one's own perspective is what is under scrutiny, then everything said is "mean" and "unfair", isn't it? Quote: You know you couldn't get Bill Gates elected president because he is a geek, especially when the likes a political machine that employes the swift boaters ilk....No matter how much money he had, he couldn't get elected Bill Gates doesn't need to run. Just like George Soros doesn't. Both have found that they can affect the political process much more effectively by putting their money to work for them. Bill Gates and the Swift Boat vets? That's no different than the George Soros and MoveOn.org arrangement...and both employed the exact same means of attacking each other. That just affirms what I said earlier: the supper-wealthy stay out of the political arena, preferring to exercise their power through bought political proxies. Quote: Just like they did with each of our war heros, Kerry and McCaine... What was done to these two was no different than what Bush has been subjected to ever since he began running for his first term. It's appalling to me that neither side is willing to discuss issues seriously...it's all a matter of addressing just enough to continue power. Quote: I _thought_ you were still eating from the bowl of sugar frosted flakes. To get balance, you need 7 grain cereal for breakfast, along with some fruit... Of course, it takes some getting used to, but it is better for you.... You really ought to listen to the compassion and fairness issues of the day...Some people call it 'balance'...I call it food for thought.... No...to get balance, one needs to eat proteins, carbohydratyes, and fats, in the proper amounts. one can stick with the cereal and fruit diet...or can expand their horizons to include serious proteins and complex carbs. Compassion and fairness issues? That depends on how one wants to define those words. Are you saying that the conservative perspective doesn't consider these? Regards all Ted Quote "As iron sharpens iron, so also does one man sharpen another" - Proverbs 27:17 "The offense of the cross is that the cross is a confession of human frailty and sin and of inability to do any good thing. To take the cross of Christ means to depend solely on Him for everything, and this is the abasement of all human pride. Men love to fancy themselves independent. But let the cross be preached, let it be made known that in man dwells no good thing and that all must be received as a gift, and straightway someone is offended." Ellet J. Waggoner, The Glad Tidings "Courage is being scared to death - and saddling up anyway" - John Wayne "The person who pays an ounce of principle for a pound of popularity gets badly cheated" - Ronald Reagan
Amelia Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 Nice to see you back posting Ted. You have been missed. <img src="/ubbtreads/images/graemlins/amen2.gif" alt="" /> Quote <p><span style="color:#0000FF;"><span style="font-weight:bold;"><span style="font-style:italic;">"Do not use harmful words, but only helpful words, the kind that build up and provide what is needed, so that what you say will do good to those who hear you."</span></span> Eph 4:29</span><br><br><img src="http://banners.wunderground.com/weathersticker/gizmotimetemp_both/US/OR/Fairview.gif" alt="Fairview.gif"> Fairview Or</p>
Ted Oplinger Posted April 2, 2006 Posted April 2, 2006 Well, Amelia, it's good to be getting back into the groove again. Thanks muchos for the welcome back! Ted Quote "As iron sharpens iron, so also does one man sharpen another" - Proverbs 27:17 "The offense of the cross is that the cross is a confession of human frailty and sin and of inability to do any good thing. To take the cross of Christ means to depend solely on Him for everything, and this is the abasement of all human pride. Men love to fancy themselves independent. But let the cross be preached, let it be made known that in man dwells no good thing and that all must be received as a gift, and straightway someone is offended." Ellet J. Waggoner, The Glad Tidings "Courage is being scared to death - and saddling up anyway" - John Wayne "The person who pays an ounce of principle for a pound of popularity gets badly cheated" - Ronald Reagan
Moderators lazarus Posted April 3, 2006 Author Moderators Posted April 3, 2006 Quote: Ann Coulter mean? Rush Limbaugh mean? Their rhetoric is actually tame compared to what Gore, Reid, Pelosi, et. al., speak of. You're kidding right! Coulter/Limbaugh tame????? compared to...you listen to haniity right! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein
Dr. Shane Posted April 3, 2006 Posted April 3, 2006 I haven't listened to Coulter much and I readily admit that Hanity and Limbaugh are far from tame. However Howard Dean and Ted Kennedy are off-the-chart radicals. I like watching Hannity and Combs mostly because of Alan Combs. I think he is a well-thought-out liberal. I often disagree with him but he has tact and integrity. I think he shows himself much more well-mannered than Hanity. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Ted Oplinger Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 Quote: However Howard Dean and Ted Kennedy are off-the-chart radicals. Shane, that's what I had in mind when made my references. Alan Combs has the liberal viewpoint with integrity. Senator Leiberman is another. Lazarus, Hanity and Limbaugh may be bomb-throwers in your eyes, yet they are but Cub Scouts compared to several in the Democratic leadership and in the media today. Perhaps that is why those two have radio audiences in the millions everyday. Actually, Lazarus, I don't get to listen to talk radio, nor do I have a avid appetite for the political news and commentary anymore. Too much hatred being vented, and I despise the "Gotcha!" political games currently being practiced. When I was an avid listener, I listened to both the conservative Rush, followed by the liberal Alan Combs. Both were able to make strong points on issues; however, when I did some independent searching for facts and news, I found the Rush was indeed correct far more often than Alan on several issues. However, Rush's personality means he doesn't convey that stance with tact at times (I guess that's what "illustrating absurdity with absurdity" means). Forgive me if I don't join with the pile-ons - my doctor says it's bad for the blood pressure, and he doesn't want to raise my dosage up higher than it needs to be! Regards all, Ted Quote "As iron sharpens iron, so also does one man sharpen another" - Proverbs 27:17 "The offense of the cross is that the cross is a confession of human frailty and sin and of inability to do any good thing. To take the cross of Christ means to depend solely on Him for everything, and this is the abasement of all human pride. Men love to fancy themselves independent. But let the cross be preached, let it be made known that in man dwells no good thing and that all must be received as a gift, and straightway someone is offended." Ellet J. Waggoner, The Glad Tidings "Courage is being scared to death - and saddling up anyway" - John Wayne "The person who pays an ounce of principle for a pound of popularity gets badly cheated" - Ronald Reagan
Moderators lazarus Posted April 4, 2006 Author Moderators Posted April 4, 2006 Quote: Hanity and Limbaugh may be bomb-throwers in your eyes, yet they are but Cub Scouts compared to several in the Democratic leadership and in the media today. Perhaps that is why those two have radio audiences in the millions everyday. I am genuinely surprised that you would think the democratic leadership is somehow more radical than Hanity and Limbaugh. Talk show host are basically entertainers. Limbaugh is a good entertainer and his style is to say outrageous things! there are numerous examples of this. Coulter has built her persona on being extreem. These guys have millions of listeners because they are "bomb throwers"! I think the Democratic leadership is generally pretty tame and often lame in their public statements. I would love to see some examples of their radical extreemism! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein
Dr. Shane Posted April 4, 2006 Posted April 4, 2006 Howard Dean has said that GW Bush knew about 9/11 before it happened and did nothing to stop it. Howard Dean has said that Republicans have never worked an honest day in their lives. Howard Dean has said he hates Republicans. Howard Dean has said the only way Republicans can get blacks in a room is that if they (the blacks) are hired help. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Moderators lazarus Posted April 5, 2006 Author Moderators Posted April 5, 2006 It would be good to see quotes! Quote Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocrities. The latter cannot understand it when a man does not thoughtlessly submit to hereditary prejudices but honestly and courageously uses his intelligence. Einstein
Neil D Posted April 5, 2006 Posted April 5, 2006 Quote: lazarus said: It would be good to see quotes! Indeed...I would like to see this from main stream media and not some conservative website whose only purpose is to slant the views, sites like Drudge et al would totally unacceptable... ABC, NBC, CBS, would be acceptable...So would other sites like the Pew Grant for Journalism who proport to be independants...Fox, is NOT acceptable, as it has always had an agenda that is NOT "balanced and fair" despite what it claims and does. So, guys, let's see those "mean spirited democrates" and thier nasty quotes... Oh, and Ted, I have no computer and limited access. So, some time down the road I will reply to your PM.... Quote Democracy is a device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve. George Bernard Shaw
Dr. Shane Posted April 5, 2006 Posted April 5, 2006 Just do a google search. I heard the sound bites on Hannity & Combs. Howard Dean actually went on the program and didn't deny saying any of it. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Nicodema Posted April 6, 2006 Posted April 6, 2006 [tagging on] The problem with all this partisan bickering is that no one can raise a valid point anymore without being immediately accused of doing nothing but more partisan bickering. That spells doom & disaster for ANY kind of national discourse. If we can't even talk about the problems how are we going to educate others concerning them and work toward solutions? Quote "After such knowledge, what forgiveness?" -- T.S. Eliot
Dr. Shane Posted April 6, 2006 Posted April 6, 2006 Part of the problem is that the Democrats have no majority in any area of the government so they are despartly fighting for power. They feel that as the opposition party their role is to oppose anything and everything the majority party favors. That type of attitude is going to make everything partisan. Now on immergration reform we see a little less partisanship. Although even there we have some like Hilary Clinton and Ted Kennedy trying to make partisan hay out of it. There are issues that shouldn't be partisan. If we examine the parties' platforms and their historical positions there are a number of issues that shouldn't be partisan. Immirgration National defense Energy Education Civil rights Free trade Prison reform There are issues where the parties have drawn lines. Taxation: Demorcrats favor higher taxes and more government entitlement programs Entitlement programs: Republicans prefer tax-exempt charities provide more services and the government less services. Subcontracts: Republicans prefer to contract private industry to preform government tasks and Democrats prefer expanding government to self-perform any such tasks. (TSA is a fine example) Abortion: Republicans seek to limit and/or ban abortion and Democrats favor unrestricted access to abortion Healthcare: Republicans favor keeping healthcare in the private sector and Democrats favor government-run helathcare. Labor unions: Republicans favor the right to work and Democrats favor mandatory union membership. Gay rights: Democrats favor a special status for gays while Republicans do not favor any special rights. Quote Pastoral Family Counselor... Find me at www.PostumCafe.com Author of Peculiar Christianity
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.