Yossarian

Some of you leftists spend a lot of time predicting what the "knuckle draggers" are going to do when you should worry about what the free-loaders, racists, and anarchists do if 1) George Zimmerman goes free 2) President Obama is voted out of office 3) Obamacare is not fully enacted 4) work requirements for welfare is reinstated, and 5) Fast and Furious reveals that both the President and AG are guilty of covering up the extent of the scandal. I would say there will likely be rioting, but we have already seen that from OWS. And the NBPP won't be happy until Zimmerman is strung up. When the freeloaders, racists, and anarchists erupt, they won't care if you're a leftist or not.

When the Government passes 2,600-page laws without rules written yet and with hidden taxes that no one has fully analyzed to determine their impact, most business owners (and banks for that matter) hold onto their capital instead of expanding their businesses and hiring people. Manufacturers decide to try and wait until consumer sending picks up and reduce their inventories and stop hiring as well. That was one of the more important reasons that the depression in 1937 was worse than that following the crash in 1929. The Affordable Care Act has had the same effect, and Ben Nelson cast the deciding vote for it - helping to prolong the recession, in my opinion, and turning the Nebraskan voters against him. Then everyone was holding their capital waiting to see what the SCOTUS was going to rule. It ruled the ACA constitutional, but businesses are still holding onto their money. Many believe that they are holding onto it until after November to see if the the current administration with its apparent goal of 2.0 % growth comes back for another four years.

Good question. I suspect that the average farmer believes that the Democrat party is more concerned with urban areas and minorities who live there. Back when the Democrats were the party of the Klan, most southern farmers were Democrats too, but as the Democrats moved away from the racism of the day, farmers moved away from the party. What I find interesting is the way the average farmer will rant and rave about welfare in the cities while he's busy pocketing money derived from subsidies or from conservation programs (land banks). Now, the other side of the coins is that farming is one heck of a gamble (this year is a good example), but they have guarantees in place. Democrats love farmers when the crop is good and U.S. corn and wheat are shipped around the world to feed those people incapable of raising a crop - for whatever reason. I am a very conservative voter, but I'd rather see food go to feed people than to ship arms overseas when U.S. interests do not clearly demand it. But I also think it's amusing that the liberals hate ethanol because its production takes food out of the mouths of foreigners who need it. I pause and feel a tiny bit of guilt when I fill up with 10% ethanol. One other thought - farming is too much work for me. That dawn to dusk thing leaves me cold.

I too am troubled when a party has incentives to do harm to the country. I can think of several trillion examples.

And those donors don't care where the jobs are. Big business is international I'm curious, when does Ben Nelson vote with the Democrats? When his vote helps prolong a recession.

Exactly--like psychology. If we were to not question the assumption, we would still be thinking that all boys want to have sex with their mother and kill their father (Oedipus Complex) and all girls want to have sex with their father and kill their mother (Elektra Complex) that Sigmund Freud proposed. I am puzzled by the example you have chosen. Are you a Freudian?

I'm not sure if you quite understand what critical thinking is. Making an argument personal is not critical thinking. He was merely making an observation. Usually when people play the "it's getting personal" card, it's because someone said something like "Your a dumb ass if you think you didn't lurn no critical thunking in science class," but I digress. When someone says they took a bunch of classes without "critical thinking" ever being mentioned, to prove that they didn't need it, it's easy to get the impression that they don't understand what it means. No one mentions critical thinking when they're trying to help students improve at it. It was a completely nonsensical thing to say. Not sure what your rant has to do with GOP in Texas, but okay. I never said i didn't need to learn to think critically. Everyone wants to help the people in Texas with their education system. i don't know how they rank, but one of you guys who surf the web on your bosses dime should look that up. Public employees excluded.

I'm not sure if you quite understand what critical thinking is. Making an argument personal is not critical thinking.

someone has a case of the 'pc police' over here. Ridiculing the mentally impaired (retarded, if you will) has been in very, very poor taste since well before "pc" came into common usage. Hearing Barack Obama say what he did made me cringe, and I am not prone to cringeing. you are right. he needed to be more sensitive, he must not have been taught critical thinking in school. I still find this to be offensive even when you make jest of it.

someone has a case of the 'pc police' over here. Ridiculing the mentally impaired (retarded, if you will) has been in very, very poor taste since well before "pc" came into common usage. Hearing Barack Obama say what he did made me cringe, and I am not prone to cringeing.

romneycare? Didn't cost me a cent. that is a pretty facile response. Truth sometimes is.

becomes And becomes Yikes, did I say that? You are right for the most part...so, please put this in the proper context: "I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something."

All I am saying is that with the the U.S. education system has bigger problems than insensitivity and closed-mindedness. Of course, bashing Texans is always great fun, so carry on.

romneycare? Didn't cost me a cent.

Oh, I understood and learned all about biology, botany, algebra, calculus, and trig without having "critical thinking" mentioned once in those classrooms. Believe things like these? "The private sector is just fine" "You didn't build it." Hopefully there's going to be a guy out of his current job on 20 January because of this kind of nonsense he's been spouting. so only when you were explicitly told you were learning critical thinking skills, you were learning critical thinking skills? When I was told I was learning math, I was learning math. Again, all of this is good only if a person leaves school with acquired knowledge that helps them do more than just be sensitive and open-minded. Plus, it's good if he or she knows the difference between "your" and "you're." It makes them appear to be less imbecilic.

I suppose you expect an argument, but you won't get one from me, although I do disagree with your last sentence since I see Obama as the better of two bad options (precisely the way I felt with every vote I've cast for the last 25 years). As for the other bits, blindly believing whatever is said by any politician in general, or American politicians in particular is foolish. That blind acceptance is what both politically parties and every religion in the world rely on. Edit to add a response to your edited addition: A student may very well memorize all of the concepts and be able to recall them for exams. Rote recall isn't the same as truly understanding a subject, though. That's why I made the distinction of being able to "get" a subject. You make rote recall sound like a crime of some sort. Next time you see your doctor, ask him about medical school and the method they use. As for "getting" a subject, I "got" calculus by memorizing the rules (as you do in most math courses). There's not a lot of room for self expression. Like my instructor told me, "Taking this course will do nothing except make you a better person." Plus, it filled a math requirement.

When Romney backs something, it doesn't cost us tax dollars.

Yikes. As you said, it doesn't take much time to mine those little gems, and 'm not even posting and getting paid at the same time. Besides, the President has been spewing them for four years now.

Oh, I understood and learned all about biology, botany, algebra, calculus, and trig without having "critical thinking" mentioned once in those classrooms. Believe things like these? "The private sector is just fine" "You didn't build it." Hopefully there's going to be a guy out of his current job on 20 January because of this kind of nonsense he's been spouting.

Not sure what these inane remarks have to do with Barack Obama's gaffe-prone abilities, but you have been keeping a little stockpile going. You sure you're a "moderate"? what do your inane remarks by obama have to do with anything? all you did was provide a story about not using a teleprompter and then a bunch of 'gaffes'? what do they have to do with each other, or anything? and since knapplc criticizes romney, it is impossible for him to be a moderate? I was referring to Romney's remarks as inane. For all I know he too believes there are 58 states. And that they speak Austrian in Austria. Obviously I was too subtle with my post regarding the relationship between gaffes and teleprompters. How's this: President Obama is prone to screw up when he doesn't use a teleprompter. No Teleprompter = Gaffes. Not sure knapplc wants your help - I know I would not. As for being a moderate, I have not noticed his being critical of the President very often. I keep a stockpile of President Obama's gaffes because I do not like him.

Not sure what these inane remarks have to do with Barack Obama's gaffe-prone abilities, but you have been keeping a little stockpile going. You sure you're a "moderate"?

I might just have to revise my prediction that President Obama is going to win re-election based upon this bit of news. (http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/238279-president-switches-off-his-teleprompter) In the past, he has said some pretty "interesting" stuff when he has tried to wing it: "I've now been in 57 states -- I think one left to go." "I don't know how you say it in Austrian." "The private sector is doing fine." "At a certain point, you've made enough money." "If I had a son, he'd look like Trayvon." "I bowled a 129. It's like -- it was like Special Olympics, or something." "They get bitter, they cling to guns or religion or antipathy to people who aren't like them." "I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody." "You didn't build that." No one can predict how this is going to turn out, but I think it's a good idea. After all, it looks silly hauling in flags, a dais, speakers, and teleprompters into a grade-school lunchroom just to say hi to first and second graders..

If anyone wants to teach kids critical thinking skills, then great. Just do it after you're sure they understand math, some basic sciences, the way the U.S. Government operates, how to read, maybe some logic, and how to write a sentence. Is that too much to ask?

Did you actually type in "it seems like a free market success story"? If going broke is your definition of a success story, then the Obama administration is really succeeding. As for my point, I think that giving millions of tax dollars to a company who didn't have a trained workforce is a bad investment. If it's not the President's place to "meddle with free enterprise" then it's not his place to be throwing around millions of dollars to fund them. Solyndra cost us half a billion. at some point will you ever post something football related? Yeah...in 45 days.

Did you actually type in "it seems like a free market success story"? If going broke is your definition of a success story, then the Obama administration is really succeeding. As for my point, I think that giving millions of tax dollars to a company who didn't have a trained workforce is a bad investment. If it's not the President's place to "meddle with free enterprise" then it's not his place to be throwing around millions of dollars to fund them. Solyndra cost us half a billion.