prole

I'm not at all surprised that this always turns into a "personal responsibility" issue, given how deeply embedded that particular set of ideas is in American thinking. What is more puzzling is why "social responsibility" seems to exist in inverse relation. "Pay your debts, but bitch, moan, and evade paying taxes." More stupid cowboy bullshit, I reckon, mixed of course with criminally mismanaged use of existing tax money for misguided ends and stagnant wages. Making education more affordable to those seeking it, those who've already got it, and those who'd like to get more could address any number of social needs and make us a better country for it. Doctors and lawyers that could make decisions influenced by their better instincts than working off their med and law school debts working for corporate goons and pharmasites, continuing educational credits for those who've already paid their debts to use learning a new skill or study something that interests them, a hundred or more dollars a month to spend on a quality GM product? Where's the downside? We develop as society when our friends, neighbors, and co-workers are smarter and we enrich our lives when we learn. We should be making it easier for people to get access to higher education and easing the burden for those those who've already gotten it, not exhuming Charlton Heston's bootstrap-pulling diatribe in order to justify the creation of a class-based educational caste system.

Thanks Miss Cleo! [video:youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6UTxKKhqfk Oh, and I'm sure the drywallers that did your house were thankful to you for keeping them in airplane glue for another day. Great contribution, now head on down to Walmart and save a starving child by purchasing some Bratz dolls. Oh, and no need to explain about the poverty, your baby picture you use for an avatar says it all.

Once again the reality that the cost of a college education is fast outstripping the ability of middle-class families' ability to afford it (even factoring in meager subsidies) is lost on you. Then again, the inability for conservatives to follow the logic of a given situation to its conclusion or think ahead is their hallmark. Should the benefits of a college education be limited to a wealthy minority? If current trends continue, that may be the case. While you may be resigned to your sad fate, I doubt that many people are going to be too stoked to be working their asses off without the hope that their kids might achieve something better. Personally, I think the benefits of quality, structured higher education should be available to anyone, regardless of their ability to pay. A functioning democracy depends on an educated populace and the joys of a well-rounded knowledge of the world is valuable in and of itself. I'm sure all this is lost on you as well. I'll make it easier for someone like you, think of it this way: who's going to employ those high-school grads, the Han Chinese?

...not tax cuts.

What the hell good is that going to do? Alot more than you bitching on the internet will. Wrong!

What the hell good is that going to do?

Islamuslimania!

This one-sided "economic growth is good no matter what, rising tide, no pain no gain, sweatshops is good, destruction is creation, 300 kinds of toothpaste is freedom, let's all get rich now by any means necessary so we can afford to build zoos for whatever's left when we're done, buying plastic shit saves a Chinese baby so buy more of it" nonsense has run its course. I think we're all familiar with what capitalism has been capable of doing (no need for your dissertaion on the miracles of meat refrigeration). Now it's time to address what it is not and never will be capable of doing. Namely, wiping its own ass in terms of the ecological, psychic, and social dislocations it creates.

Them's the (tax) breaks.

Yeah, fuckin' civil rights whackjobs, who needs 'em!

SERFROADER!

"You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war."--Albert Einstein

"they" as I stated before are those that use violence and fear as their only tools for negotiation. "Us" would be those that desire cooperation and peace. I made no assumption or suggestion what country either side was; nor even that uses and thems were in separate countries. As long as there are those that wish harm upon us and as long as there are people who use violence as the only means to voice their opinions, there will always have to be violent men to take up arms against them. Blessed are the peacemakers...

Don't worry Alkoholeke, reinforcements who base their power and identity on violence are on their way to join you! They may need a couple extra weeks in basic though.

Sweet!

What's your fucking excuse?

Just another sad example of the failure of the big government paradigm.

In no particular order: taking advantage of killer sales at The Sharper Image, wondering if I can declare myself a bank, thinking that it was Trig that should have been named Tripp, thinking that this must be the longest period between election and inauguration days in the history of the Republic, knowing Israel Sucks, thanking Christ that I didn't buy a home when everyone was telling me that it was the best thing I could do, mourning Eartha Kitt, gettin' ready to get my drink on aka party like it's 1929, wondering if Billcoe is in a timewarp where he's 6 months behind the rest of us, wondering if Treat Williams is too old to play Blagojevich in a TV movie, does Vaginlina Jolie have a cyborg uterus, what the hell whitey is freaking out about, etc.

Thomas Friedman is the definition of a whiz-bang myth producer. "Globalization", "American Empire", "Green Capitalism": This bloated, egomaniacal gasbag would would try to convince Americans to consume their own excrement if he thought he could keep his NYT job and morons reading his books. Don't worry, just like his other "ideas", this one will be circling the memory-hole bowl in five years while he's convincing of his next great "discovery".

This is the economic equivalent of holocaust denial.

Whew, glad that bullshit's over with.

Nope, never tried it. You seem "curious" though. (Not that there's anything wrong with that.) No theories at work here. The logical conclusion to the Pope's statement: "gay sex is a grave threat to humanity's future existence on planet Earth", is that gay sex is so tempting and so superior to straight sex that if people are given the choice between straight and gay sex, people may never engage in procreation again. Only a homo would make that argument. The Pope is gay. I rest my case.

No need. Anyone who thinks that gay sex is a threat to the very survival of the human species must by definition think that gay sex is so good that once you participate in it, you'll never do straight sex again.

Anybody this homophobic has got to be a closet case.

PFFFT! These drug allegations are designed to keep the media cameras focused on the crank-cooking granny at the county courthouse and away from the Anchorage airport when the impostor-baby arrives. They're pulling out all the stops on this one.