Coco wrote:
American colleges (specifically state funded colleges) tend to adhere to the mantra of "Submission to ideas" rather than "Permission to ideas", along with all the pushing of Trigger-Warnings, Safe-Space (safe area) etc. etc...list goes on... Pussyfying students to the point where they become offended or fearful of things they WILL eventually experience in the real world. They should be encouraging them to debate ideas and develop their own critical thinking skills so they are able to think for themselves, and cope with life without being offended at every twist and turn. You cannot wander through life with a helmet on, and a pillow under your rear end.
Am I making any sense because I had 2 glasses of wine with dinner... lol
What do you think the TeeVee is doing to the rest of the population?
Americans are the most terrified population on the planet. Terrified by invented boogeymen.
But the rest of us are catching up fast.
Who or what is the boogeyman?
Muslims, communists, Putin, the deficit, social security. Whatever they want you to be terrified of, Americans will oblige.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
cashead wrote:Interesting to see how there hasn't been any mention of what Sanders got and probably will get out of Clinton in exchange for an endorsement.
What did he get?
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
cashead wrote:Interesting to see how there hasn't been any mention of what Sanders got and probably will get out of Clinton in exchange for an endorsement.
Well, time will tell. At the moment he is getting rhetoric but Obama had that in droves. Lets see how his policy pillars play out once Clinton is in power. My guess is it will be sweet F. A. There are already things like the TPPA which Clinton has been a huge supporter of, where she has pulled her support but "conveniently" her representatives on the DNC policy committee are still supporting. She is still the largest receiver of Wall Street funds of any candidate on either side.
cashead wrote:Interesting to see how there hasn't been any mention of what Sanders got and probably will get out of Clinton in exchange for an endorsement.
Well, time will tell. At the moment he is getting rhetoric but Obama had that in droves. Lets see how his policy pillars play out once Clinton is in power. My guess is it will be sweet F. A. There are already things like the TPPA which Clinton has been a huge supporter of, where she has pulled her support but "conveniently" her representatives on the DNC policy committee are still supporting. She is still the largest receiver of Wall Street funds of any candidate on either side.
Agreed. It's easy for her to lie and say she believes in 'progressive' stuff and then do nothing or do the opposite. Bernie supporters imo know that she's the opposite of progressive. She's an extreme neoliberal economically and a neoconservative on foreign policy.
It's all about the rich for her.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
canta_brian wrote:Any reason that sanders couldn't have stood as an independent? Did he see that as handing the white house to trump?
On a more basic level, could an independent president ever get policy through the Senate?
It's almost impossible to get on the ballot and totally impossible to get into the debates. He could conceivably have run on the Green Party ticket but would have had to make the move before the Dem convention.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Coco wrote:
American colleges (specifically state funded colleges) tend to adhere to the mantra of "Submission to ideas" rather than "Permission to ideas", along with all the pushing of Trigger-Warnings, Safe-Space (safe area) etc. etc...list goes on... Pussyfying students to the point where they become offended or fearful of things they WILL eventually experience in the real world. They should be encouraging them to debate ideas and develop their own critical thinking skills so they are able to think for themselves, and cope with life without being offended at every twist and turn. You cannot wander through life with a helmet on, and a pillow under your rear end.
Am I making any sense because I had 2 glasses of wine with dinner... lol
Do you use "Social justice warrior" as a pejorative?
That and Generation Snowflake. Both very apt pejoratives.
First Breitbart and now this islamophobic nut job Watson?
Dude, please.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
cashead wrote:Interesting to see how there hasn't been any mention of what Sanders got and probably will get out of Clinton in exchange for an endorsement.
What did he get?
The biggie is that she's adopted his college tuition plan (or a version of it) where in-state public colleges and universities will be subsidised for low-income families, and the other major is that there will be expanded public healthcare funding and coverage, which will go from $3.6B to $40B.
Good luck to her on getting that spending past Congress!
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
canta_brian wrote:Any reason that sanders couldn't have stood as an independent? Did he see that as handing the white house to trump?
On a more basic level, could an independent president ever get policy through the Senate?
It's almost impossible to get on the ballot and totally impossible to get into the debates. He could conceivably have run on the Green Party ticket but would have had to make the move before the Dem convention.
Its also impossible to get anything done once you are in power (if you managed to get there), as the houses are filled with Democrats and Republicans. We've seen how much of a stalemate its been with the Democrats in the white house but not quite controlling the senate, you could imagine how impossible it would be for an independent who literally has no support.
cashead wrote:
The biggie is that she's adopted his college tuition plan (or a version of it) where in-state public colleges and universities will be subsidised for low-income families, and the other major is that there will be expanded public healthcare funding and coverage, which will go from $3.6B to $40B.
Good luck to her on getting that spending past Congress!
Considering the sheer jump, it's probably a ploy. Give a number that'll get the Republicunts shitting themselves, and scale it down to what would be a comparatively reasonable number.
Sadly getting Republicans to agree to ANY increased funding will be pretty tricky, particularly for Hillary. Unless it's arming the police with more paramilitary weapons.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
Good luck to her on getting that spending past Congress!
Considering the sheer jump, it's probably a ploy. Give a number that'll get the Republicunts shitting themselves, and scale it down to what would be a comparatively reasonable number.
Sadly getting Republicans to agree to ANY increased funding will be pretty tricky, particularly for Hillary. Unless it's arming the police with more paramilitary weapons.
Reading your comments is like watching the mainstream news.
Its all so irrelevant.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
Good luck to her on getting that spending past Congress!
Considering the sheer jump, it's probably a ploy. Give a number that'll get the Republicunts shitting themselves, and scale it down to what would be a comparatively reasonable number.
Sadly getting Republicans to agree to ANY increased funding will be pretty tricky, particularly for Hillary. Unless it's arming the police with more paramilitary weapons.
Eugene Wrayburn wrote:
Sadly getting Republicans to agree to ANY increased funding will be pretty tricky, particularly for Hillary. Unless it's arming the police with more paramilitary weapons.
Reading your comments is like watching the mainstream news.
Its all so irrelevant.
You don't fucking learn, don't you? Didn't you get banned once already for acting like a complete sack of dicks? You post a thread about how "discussion is dying in this part of the forums," it' this kind of shit that contributes to it, you fucking crybaby.
Cas, I basically ignore him. He got banned for being abusive. I couldn't give a monkey's what he thinks of my posts.
I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.
UGagain wrote:
Reading your comments is like watching the mainstream news.
Its all so irrelevant.
You don't fucking learn, don't you? Didn't you get banned once already for acting like a complete sack of dicks? You post a thread about how "discussion is dying in this part of the forums," it' this kind of shit that contributes to it, you fucking crybaby.
Cas, I basically ignore him. He got banned for being abusive. I couldn't give a monkey's what he thinks of my posts.
What part of the kid's post isn't personal abuse?
The censorship on this board has been commented upon by others.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
If your ratio of rugby posts to politics posts drops below say 2:3, you are barred from politics threads until you adequately contribute to the main purpose of the forum.
______________________
Dominating the SHMB
======================
If your ratio of rugby posts to politics posts drops below say 2:3, you are barred from politics threads until you adequately contribute to the main purpose of the forum.
If your ratio of rugby posts to politics posts drops below say 2:3, you are barred from politics threads until you adequately contribute to the main purpose of the forum.
The SHMB is dominated by you and the abusive Hollywood kid. Both of whom have chips on their should about Australia and Australians. And one of whom is already on ignore and the other will probably go back there soon.
It's not conducive.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
If your ratio of rugby posts to politics posts drops below say 2:3, you are barred from politics threads until you adequately contribute to the main purpose of the forum.
The SHMB is dominated by you and the abusive Hollywood kid. Both of whom have chips on their should about Australia and Australians. And one of whom is already on ignore and the other will probably go back there soon.
It's not conducive.
How do I "dominate"'exactly? Apart from bothering to start threads and stuff.
______________________
Dominating the SHMB
======================
The hypocrisy, the sense of right wing white male privilege, the authoritarianism.
You all seem to think you can abuse and belittle people with impunity. And then you are outraged when the targets don't back down or you're called on the bigotry.
Pathetic.
As for the maths. There are mathematic 'theories' on both sides, they are not the same as mathematical facts. I asked for maths.
If your ratio of rugby posts to politics posts drops below say 2:3, you are barred from politics threads until you adequately contribute to the main purpose of the forum.
The SHMB is dominated by you and the abusive Hollywood kid. Both of whom have chips on their should about Australia and Australians. And one of whom is already on ignore and the other will probably go back there soon.
It's not conducive.
Hey everyone, quote all of my posts from now on!
I would, but it might be too dominating.
Besides, I can't carry you AND the big Straya-shaped chip on my shoulder.
______________________
Dominating the SHMB
======================
