Andy9o8 0 #26 January 26, 2010 Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. A perfect example of how correlation does not equate causation. Kids who are impoverished often need free lunches; and kids who are impoverished often perform poorly in school. Take away the free lunches, Lt. Gov. Asshole, and what you'll get is even hungrier impoverished kids who will still perform poorly; in fact, they'll probably perform even more poorly because they're even hungrier. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
futuredivot 0 #27 January 26, 2010 QuoteSome of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. Actually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. What he said was we'll make the parents of kids that get fed have interaction with educators, get them to buy in to the kids education. Probably in hopes of getting the kid more support at home.You are only as strong as the prey you devour Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DJL 232 #28 January 26, 2010 Don't put ME in the "You Guys" group. I'm neither a Republican nor Conservative."I encourage all awesome dangerous behavior." - Jeffro Fincher Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,426 #29 January 26, 2010 >When a person runs for office under the tenant that their value and >belief system makes them a better person to hold that office, then they >will be judged by their words and behavior. Agreed. Judgment: he's an asshole. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #30 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteSome of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. Actually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. What he said was we'll make the parents of kids that get fed have interaction with educators, get them to buy in to the kids education. Probably in hopes of getting the kid more support at home. Quote http://www.thestate.com/local/story/1123844.html (Bauer:) "You go to a school where there's an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, 'Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don't attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.' This still makes him an ignorant asshole. This isn't like welfare money, which may or may not be spent to benefit a child. This food served at school; and it isn't being eaten by the parents, it's being eaten by the kids. The kids are innocent, and cannot help the circumstances of their birth, the poverty they live in or the parenting (or, often, grandparenting) they do, or do not, receive. Punishing a child by literally taking food out of his mouth because he has non-compliant adults at home is callous and heartless. Edit: Ha! I beat Lalor by 1 minute. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #31 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,426 #32 January 26, 2010 >“I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the >worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” Along similar lines, the physically disabled students at my college (paraplegics, blind, deaf, missing a hand or foot etc) were among the hardest working and most successful students there. Thus, if you want to improve test scores, the answer is straightforward - cut off student's feet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #33 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #34 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He has loudly opposed Homosexual Marriage, Homosexual Sodomy and Homosexual Adoption. He has profoundly defined marriage as between straights only. Not only that, but he has pushed for the words, "I BELIEVE" and the Christian Cross on South Carolina license plates. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This would be a thread drift, but, he don't sound so bad now. You're doing a great job of spreading the word. Thank you.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jclalor 12 #35 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote***Quote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #36 January 26, 2010 Quote I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for the food. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,426 #37 January 26, 2010 >If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #38 January 26, 2010 Quote Don't put ME in the "You Guys" group. I'm neither a Republican nor Conservative. Uh huh RIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHT Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #39 January 26, 2010 Quote>If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. most people are tired of people sitting back and collecting tax dollars without effort expended. It was not "let the kids starve" it is make them earn the meal, just like every one that works and pays their taxes. I had to work for my food why shouldn't the kids and adults getting a part of my tax dollars? This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #40 January 26, 2010 QuoteIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a Democrat you can't criticize Democrats. Clearly we know that's not the case.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #41 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote What tIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a communist you can't criticize communism. That doesn't make any sense at all. Well sure, anybody can judge anybody. Only a Christian can evaluate the path of another Christian. Outside opinions just don't carry much weight. Christians are in the world, not of the world.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #42 January 26, 2010 Quote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #43 January 26, 2010 Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #44 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #45 January 26, 2010 Quote This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. And the problem with Cons is that they have no problem handing out free dinners and a seven figure bonus to people who do their jobs so badly that they ruin the lives of thousands of other taxpayers. Since we're throwing out blanket generalizations I thought I'd chime in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #46 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land. So how does THAT work? Let's say I've never considered religion ever in my life. I'm in this world, but as soon as I say I accept Jesus Christ in my heart I'm no longer of this world? That doesn't make any sense at all.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #47 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. That is why you include the kids. The parents may or may not be deadbeats but having the kid earn his lunch by adding extra studies or help clean the lunch room and other projects that benifit the kid will help develope the kid into a productive adult. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #48 January 26, 2010 QuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #49 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000? Didn't someone say "give someone a fish and he will eat today - teach someone how to fish and he'll feed himself for life" I like to live in real life not in a book that may or may not be fiction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #50 January 26, 2010 Quote This still makes him an ignorant asshole. Here's my issue. If he's ignorant then he's not an asshole because he simply doesn't know any better. I don't think he's ignorant. I think he's just an asshole. [Reply] Punishing a child by literally taking food out of his mouth because he has non-compliant adults at home is callous and heartless. I concur wholeheartedly. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 Next Page 2 of 4 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
billvon 2,426 #32 January 26, 2010 >“I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the >worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” Along similar lines, the physically disabled students at my college (paraplegics, blind, deaf, missing a hand or foot etc) were among the hardest working and most successful students there. Thus, if you want to improve test scores, the answer is straightforward - cut off student's feet. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #33 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #34 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He has loudly opposed Homosexual Marriage, Homosexual Sodomy and Homosexual Adoption. He has profoundly defined marriage as between straights only. Not only that, but he has pushed for the words, "I BELIEVE" and the Christian Cross on South Carolina license plates. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This would be a thread drift, but, he don't sound so bad now. You're doing a great job of spreading the word. Thank you.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites jclalor 12 #35 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote***Quote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #36 January 26, 2010 Quote I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for the food. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites billvon 2,426 #37 January 26, 2010 >If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Amazon 7 #38 January 26, 2010 Quote Don't put ME in the "You Guys" group. I'm neither a Republican nor Conservative. Uh huh RIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHT Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #39 January 26, 2010 Quote>If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. most people are tired of people sitting back and collecting tax dollars without effort expended. It was not "let the kids starve" it is make them earn the meal, just like every one that works and pays their taxes. I had to work for my food why shouldn't the kids and adults getting a part of my tax dollars? This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #40 January 26, 2010 QuoteIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a Democrat you can't criticize Democrats. Clearly we know that's not the case.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #41 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote What tIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a communist you can't criticize communism. That doesn't make any sense at all. Well sure, anybody can judge anybody. Only a Christian can evaluate the path of another Christian. Outside opinions just don't carry much weight. Christians are in the world, not of the world.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #42 January 26, 2010 Quote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #43 January 26, 2010 Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites RonD1120 58 #44 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites idrankwhat 0 #45 January 26, 2010 Quote This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. And the problem with Cons is that they have no problem handing out free dinners and a seven figure bonus to people who do their jobs so badly that they ruin the lives of thousands of other taxpayers. Since we're throwing out blanket generalizations I thought I'd chime in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #46 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land. So how does THAT work? Let's say I've never considered religion ever in my life. I'm in this world, but as soon as I say I accept Jesus Christ in my heart I'm no longer of this world? That doesn't make any sense at all.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #47 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. That is why you include the kids. The parents may or may not be deadbeats but having the kid earn his lunch by adding extra studies or help clean the lunch room and other projects that benifit the kid will help develope the kid into a productive adult. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites quade 3 #48 January 26, 2010 QuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #49 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000? Didn't someone say "give someone a fish and he will eat today - teach someone how to fish and he'll feed himself for life" I like to live in real life not in a book that may or may not be fiction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #50 January 26, 2010 Quote This still makes him an ignorant asshole. Here's my issue. If he's ignorant then he's not an asshole because he simply doesn't know any better. I don't think he's ignorant. I think he's just an asshole. [Reply] Punishing a child by literally taking food out of his mouth because he has non-compliant adults at home is callous and heartless. I concur wholeheartedly. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #34 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- He has loudly opposed Homosexual Marriage, Homosexual Sodomy and Homosexual Adoption. He has profoundly defined marriage as between straights only. Not only that, but he has pushed for the words, "I BELIEVE" and the Christian Cross on South Carolina license plates. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- This would be a thread drift, but, he don't sound so bad now. You're doing a great job of spreading the word. Thank you.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jclalor 12 #35 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuote***Quote***Some of the ignorance of this asshole is his trying to correlate free lunches in schools with poor performance in schools. QuoteActually, in the interest of fairness-It seems he was saying that parents in this group are less involved in the educational process. That's true. He didn't say "Kids with disinterested parents don't get fed. Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. “I can show you a bar graph where free and reduced lunch has the worst test scores in the state of South Carolina,” adding, “You show me the school that has the highest free and reduced lunch, and I’ll show you the worst test scores, folks. It’s there, period.” … “You go to a school where there’s an active participation of parents, and guess what? They have the highest test scores. So what do you do? You say, ‘Look folks, if you receive goods or services from the government and you don’t attend a parent-teacher conference, bam, you lose your benefits.’” I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #36 January 26, 2010 Quote I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for the food. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #36 January 26, 2010 Quote I agree with this. The entire problem with any welfare is that the persons receiving it dont have to do anything to receive it. I feel any welfare should have strings attached that would make it look better to find a way to handle your own financial situation instead of the government. This is a fundamental difference between the left and the right. The right says: If the parents refuse to participate in their child's education, then no free lunches for their children. This will force the parents to participate, because they will no longer have free lunches. They will now have to get jobs to provide lunches for their children and the taxpayer will be better off. The left says: If a child already has the major handicap of a parent(s) not involved in their education and on top of that, if the child comes to school hungry, study after study shows these children will perform poorly in school. poorly performing students are far more likely to drop out and be single parents, be unemployed, and end up in prison. If we spend a few hundred dollars a year now, as opposed to tens of thousands later, we save money and have a better society If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for the food. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 2,426 #37 January 26, 2010 >If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #38 January 26, 2010 Quote Don't put ME in the "You Guys" group. I'm neither a Republican nor Conservative. Uh huh RIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHT Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #39 January 26, 2010 Quote>If the parent does not want to get involved you could make the child >take extra classes or tests to aid in there education as payment for >the food. I do not want teachers in our public school system who would be willing to starve children as punishment for not taking/passing extra tests. Such people would make better prison guards than teachers. most people are tired of people sitting back and collecting tax dollars without effort expended. It was not "let the kids starve" it is make them earn the meal, just like every one that works and pays their taxes. I had to work for my food why shouldn't the kids and adults getting a part of my tax dollars? This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #40 January 26, 2010 QuoteIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a Democrat you can't criticize Democrats. Clearly we know that's not the case.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #41 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote What tIf you have not accepted Jesus Christ of Nazareth you are not in a position to examine the path of someone who is. That's a like saying if you're not a communist you can't criticize communism. That doesn't make any sense at all. Well sure, anybody can judge anybody. Only a Christian can evaluate the path of another Christian. Outside opinions just don't carry much weight. Christians are in the world, not of the world.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #42 January 26, 2010 Quote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #43 January 26, 2010 Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
RonD1120 58 #44 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land.Look for the shiny things of God revealed by the Holy Spirit. They only last for an instant but it is a Holy Instant. Let your soul absorb them. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
idrankwhat 0 #45 January 26, 2010 Quote This is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. And the problem with Cons is that they have no problem handing out free dinners and a seven figure bonus to people who do their jobs so badly that they ruin the lives of thousands of other taxpayers. Since we're throwing out blanket generalizations I thought I'd chime in. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #46 January 26, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Christians are in the world, not of the world. I see. You're a space alien? Like a stranger in a strange land. So how does THAT work? Let's say I've never considered religion ever in my life. I'm in this world, but as soon as I say I accept Jesus Christ in my heart I'm no longer of this world? That doesn't make any sense at all.quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #47 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuote Actually, in the interest of fairness. That is exactly what he stated. He stated if parents don't participate, no lunch for their kids. If nothing else, you have to love his logic. Except where the logic is flawed. Has anyone considered that it might be difficult for the parents of a working poor family to attend the conferences? I'm a father in a working unpoor family and if my wife and I were not on flexible schedules we couldn't pull it off. On the other hand, if you're one of the very few families these days who can afford to have one parent stay at home (and maintain a middle class lifestyle) , then I could see how you might not understand. That is why you include the kids. The parents may or may not be deadbeats but having the kid earn his lunch by adding extra studies or help clean the lunch room and other projects that benifit the kid will help develope the kid into a productive adult. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
quade 3 #48 January 26, 2010 QuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000?quade - The World's Most Boring Skydiver Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #49 January 26, 2010 QuoteQuoteThis is one of the problems with liberals is that they teach people how to collect a free dinner but not how to work for their dinner, this in turn teaches how to get a free ride through life. Wait, wait, wait . . . doesn't the Lord's prayer specifically say "GIVE US this day our daily bread"? Wasn't it Jesus that fed the 5,000? Didn't someone say "give someone a fish and he will eat today - teach someone how to fish and he'll feed himself for life" I like to live in real life not in a book that may or may not be fiction. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #50 January 26, 2010 Quote This still makes him an ignorant asshole. Here's my issue. If he's ignorant then he's not an asshole because he simply doesn't know any better. I don't think he's ignorant. I think he's just an asshole. [Reply] Punishing a child by literally taking food out of his mouth because he has non-compliant adults at home is callous and heartless. I concur wholeheartedly. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
