Random Political comments...

[Bliss]

How is Hillary and Obama going to criticize what Cruz said about monitoring Muslim communities for radicals, when they both signed off on - and continue to sign off on - the Patriot Act, which was created as a result of 9/11?

 

[Loki]

How is Hillary and Obama going to criticize what Cruz said about monitoring Muslim communities for radicals, when they both signed off on - and continue to sign off on - the Patriot Act, which was created as a result of 9/11?

Not quite apples to apples, what Cruz is calling for is more extreme than the Patriot act, and Obama actually pushed for and signed legislation (USA Freedom Act) that limited some of the Patriot act powers.

http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/243850-obama-signs-nsa-bill-renewing-patriot-act-powers

 

[samson1701]

 

[samson1701]

 

[Peach State Scholar]

The cost of college in this country is outlandish. If I ever have kids I'll probably tell them not to go unless they get full scholarships. When you weigh the costs and the benefits going to college isn't as valuable as it was even 20 years ago.

 

[Beasty]

The cost of college in this country is outlandish. If I ever have kids I'll probably tell them not to go unless they get full scholarships. When you weigh the costs and the benefits going to college isn't as valuable as it was even 20 years ago.

:shock:

 

[Peach State Scholar]

:shock:

Why the shock? With the cost of living steadily increasing, the cost of tuition skyrocketing at what seems like an exponential rate, and wages doing neither of those things college isn't the sure bet that it used to be. When four years of school starts to cost as much as a house we've reached about reached a tipping point.

Of course community colleges can be quite a bit cheaper (even more still if you're an in-state resident) but when we're talking about schools costing more than $10,000 a year then some serious scholarships need to be on the table.

 

[Beasty]

Why the shock? With the cost of living steadily increasing, the cost of tuition skyrocketing at what seems like an exponential rate, and wages doing neither of those things college isn't the sure bet that it used to be. When four years of school starts to cost as much as a house we've reached about reached a tipping point.

Of course community colleges can be quite a bit cheaper (even more still if you're an in-state resident) but when we're talking about schools costing more than $10,000 a year then some serious scholarships need to be on the table.

State colleges in the south aren't that bad. I'm just wondering what you see as an alternative to higher education in the technology/information age. Public grade school education was inferior before, now it's really pointless. After the 8th grade you have to be hard pressed to in order to get the slightest thing from it.

Eating healthy is too expensive as well but that doesn't mean that I see eating 4 greasy meals a day as an option. lol

So is community college the only alternative you see? Just wondering what you are thinking. Community college IS waaay better than public high school, I must say.

 

[Beasty]

Think I need to clarify myself a bit on the high school being inferior comment.

Just compare our high schools to other countries.

Now compare our Colleges to other countries. Night and day. People come from all over the world to attend our Universities.

Imagine people doing the same to bring their children to our public grade schools.

Not happening.

 

[Peach State Scholar]

State colleges in the south aren't that bad. I'm just wondering what you see as an alternative to higher education in the technology/information age. Public grade school education was inferior before, now it's really pointless. After the 8th grade you have to be hard pressed to in order to get the slightest thing from it.

Eating healthy is too expensive as well but that doesn't mean that I see eating 4 greasy meals a day as an option. lol

So is community college the only alternative you see? Just wondering what you are thinking. Community college IS waaay better than public high school, I must say.

I wouldn't say that it's the only alternative but it's starting to look like the better option financially for the majority of people. Even then I don't know how much longer even that is going to be true. But aside from that, I don't know what the alternative answer is.

Think I need to clarify myself a bit on the high school being inferior comment.

Just compare our high schools to other countries.

Now compare our Colleges to other countries. Night and day. People come from all over the world to attend our Universities.

Imagine people doing the same to bring their children to our public grade schools.

Not happening.

I actually got a lot from high school. I went to a magnet school and it honestly better prepared me for college compared to a lot of my classmates. I get what you're saying though. I agree with you that our public schools in a lot of places leave much to be desired.

 

[Beasty]

Hillary is NEVER the better option.

How can people justify voting for that woman when things like this are an absolute certainty if she becomes president (I'll copy the first part of this article for easy reading here instead of clicking on the link:

Even by the standards of arms deals between the United States and Saudi Arabia, this one was enormous. A consortium of American defense contractors led by Boeing would deliver $29 billion worth of advanced fighter jets to the United States' oil-rich ally in the Middle East.

Israeli officials were agitated, reportedly complaining to the Obama administration that this substantial enhancement to Saudi air power risked disrupting the region's fragile balance of power. The deal appeared to collide with the State Department’s documented concerns about the repressive policies of the Saudi royal family.

But now, in late 2011, Hillary Clinton’s State Department was formally clearing the sale, asserting that it was in the national interest. At press conferences in Washington to announce the department’s approval, an assistant secretary of state, Andrew Shapiro, declared that the deal had been “a top priority” for Clinton personally. Shapiro, a longtime aide to Clinton since her Senate days, added that the “U.S. Air Force and U.S. Army have excellent relationships in Saudi Arabia.”

These were not the only relationships bridging leaders of the two nations. In the years before Hillary Clinton became secretary of state, the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia contributed at least $10 million to the Clinton Foundation, the philanthropic enterprise she has overseen with her husband, former president Bill Clinton. Just two months before the deal was finalized, Boeing -- the defense contractor that manufactures one of the fighter jets the Saudis were especially keen to acquire, the F-15 -- contributed $900,000 to the Clinton Foundation, according to a company press release.

The Saudi deal was one of dozens of arms sales approved by Hillary Clinton’s State Department that placed weapons in the hands of governments that had also donated money to the Clinton family philanthropic empire, an International Business Times investigation has found.

Under Clinton's leadership, the State Department approved $165 billion worth of commercial arms sales to 20 nations whose governments have given money to the Clinton Foundation, according to an IBTimes analysis of State Department and foundation data. That figure -- derived from the three full fiscal years of Clinton’s term as Secretary of State (from October 2010 to September 2012) -- represented nearly double the value of American arms sales made to the those countries and approved by the State Department during the same period of President George W. Bush’s second term.

The Clinton-led State Department also authorized $151 billion of separate Pentagon-brokered deals for 16 of the countries that donated to the Clinton Foundation, resulting in a 143 percent increase in completed salesto those nations over the same time frame during the Bush administration. These extra sales were part of a broad increase in American military exports that accompanied Obama’s arrival in the White House. The 143 percent increase in U.S. arms sales to Clinton Foundation donors compares to an 80 percent increase in such sales to all countries over the same time period.

American defense contractors also donated to the Clinton Foundation while Hillary Clinton was secretary of state and in some cases made personal payments to Bill Clinton for speaking engagements. Such firms and their subsidiaries were listed as contractors in $163 billion worth of Pentagon-negotiated deals that were authorized by the Clinton State Department between 2009 and 2012.

The State Department formally approved these arms sales even as many of the deals enhanced the military power of countries ruled by authoritarian regimes whose human rights abuses had been criticized by the department. Algeria, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, the United Arab Emirates, Oman and Qatar all donated to the Clinton Foundation and also gained State Department clearance to buy caches of American-made weapons even as the department singled them out for a range of alleged ills, from corruption to restrictions on civil liberties to violent crackdowns against political opponents.

As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton also accused some of these countries of failing to marshal a serious and sustained campaign to confront terrorism. In a December 2009 State Department cable published by Wikileaks, Clinton complained of “an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority.” She declared that “Qatar's overall level of CT cooperation with the U.S. is considered the worst in the region.” She said the Kuwaiti government was “less inclined to take action against Kuwait-based financiers and facilitators plotting attacks.” She noted that “UAE-based donors have provided financial support to a variety of terrorist groups.” All of these countries donated to the Clinton Foundation and received increased weapons export authorizations from the Clinton-run State Department.

Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign and the Clinton Foundation did not respond to questions from the IBTimes.

In all, governments and corporations involved in the arms deals approved by Clinton’s State Department have delivered between $54 million and $141 million to the Clinton Foundation as well as hundreds of thousands of dollars in payments to the Clinton family, according to foundation and State Department records. The Clinton Foundation publishes only a rough range of individual contributors’ donations, making a more precise accounting impossible.

Taken from: http://www.ibtimes.com/clinton-foun...als-hillary-clintons-state-department-1934187

You cannot possibly read that and tell me she wouldn't sell this country to the highest Clinton "Foundation" donor.

Our options do suck, but behind closed doors who do you think Bernie would suggest that you vote for? We haven't had a decent republican president since Ike.

 

[Bookworm616]

Our options do suck, but behind closed doors who do you think Bernie would suggest that you vote for? We haven't had a decent republican president since Ike.

We haven't had many decent candidates, period.

Honestly, I've been grappling with this for awhile now.

If Hillary gets the nomination and Bernie Sanders doesn't run as an Independent, do I vote for Trump?

I believe, if Sanders loses the nomination and the Republicans throw in a candidate like Paul Ryan who hasn't been in ANY of the primaries, I will write in Bernie's name.

I just cannot, in good conscience, go from a fairly honest candidate with little to no baggage, to someone who lies and has baggage upon baggage.

I like Bernie, not because of just his policies, but because he's genuine. His message hasn't changed for decades. He seems to always be looking out for the people who don't have a voice in the government. I can't go from supporting that kind of candidate to the complete 180 of supporting Hillary. The two candidates differ so dramatically on character and moral ethics.

It's just not going to happen for me.

So, if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, my decision will almost certainly be to write in his name in November.

The message needs to be made clear to the "establishment" that the people want change and not the status quo.

 

[The Dark King]

We haven't had many decent candidates, period.

Honestly, I've been grappling with this for awhile now.

If Hillary gets the nomination and Bernie Sanders doesn't run as an Independent, do I vote for Trump?

I believe, if Sanders loses the nomination and the Republicans throw in a candidate like Paul Ryan who hasn't been in ANY of the primaries, I will write in Bernie's name.

I just cannot, in good conscience, go from a fairly honest candidate with little to no baggage, to someone who lies and has baggage upon baggage.

I like Bernie, not because of just his policies, but because he's genuine. His message hasn't changed for decades. He seems to always be looking out for the people who don't have a voice in the government. I can't go from supporting that kind of candidate to the complete 180 of supporting Hillary. The two candidates differ so dramatically on character and moral ethics.

It's just not going to happen for me.

So, if Bernie doesn't get the nomination, my decision will almost certainly be to write in his name in November.

The message needs to be made clear to the "establishment" that the people want change and not the status quo.

I totally agree but as much as I don't like her I do not trust a Trump presidency. Letting him win would be worst than voting for her.

 

[Bookworm616]

I totally agree but as much as I don't like her I do not trust a Trump presidency. Letting him win would be worst than voting for her.

This is where you and I completely disagree.

The Clintons (because let's face it, they're a package deal) have had scandals following them since Arkansas. For 30 freaking years there has been scandal after scandal after scandal following those two around.

In my experience, if there's smoke, there's almost always fire. And there's just WAY too much smoke for there not to be some or a lot of fire. Just because they haven't been arrested for anything, doesn't mean there isn't wrongdoing.

Not to mention that she's involved in a scandal RIGHT NOW.

And her use of a "homebrew" server is in violation of the FOIA. And her deletion of tens of thousands of emails is also in violation of the FOIA. The fact that she didn't turn over her emails immediately upon leaving the post of SOS should send alarm bells ringing.

Not to mention all of the seriously shady Clinton Foundation "donations" from foreign governments that benefited greatly whilst Hillary was in the State Department.

Trump says a lot of crazy stuff. No doubt. And maybe there's some truth to the rumors that the Clintons wanted him to run so it would be an "easy in" for Hillary. That I can't tell you, but I don't buy half of what he says.

He says crazy stuff and he's been in the news constantly - totally free publicity. In fact, news outlets are probably making millions off of the articles they write about him.

And I don't care how "cute" the little rhyme of "vote blue, no matter who" is, that doesn't fool me.

For me, the scariest candidate running is Hillary, followed closely by Cruz.

 

[The Dark King]

This is where you and I completely disagree.

The Clintons (because let's face it, they're a package deal) have had scandals following them since Arkansas. For 30 freaking years there has been scandal after scandal after scandal following those two around.

In my experience, if there's smoke, there's almost always fire. And there's just WAY too much smoke for there not to be some or a lot of fire. Just because they haven't been arrested for anything, doesn't mean there isn't wrongdoing.

Not to mention that she's involved in a scandal RIGHT NOW.

And her use of a "homebrew" server is in violation of the FOIA. And her deletion of tens of thousands of emails is also in violation of the FOIA. The fact that she didn't turn over her emails immediately upon leaving the post of SOS should send alarm bells ringing.

Not to mention all of the seriously shady Clinton Foundation "donations" from foreign governments that benefited greatly whilst Hillary was in the State Department.

Trump says a lot of crazy stuff. No doubt. And maybe there's some truth to the rumors that the Clintons wanted him to run so it would be an "easy in" for Hillary. That I can't tell you, but I don't buy half of what he says.

He says crazy stuff and he's been in the news constantly - totally free publicity. In fact, news outlets are probably making millions off of the articles they write about him.

And I don't care how "cute" the little rhyme of "vote blue, no matter who" is, that doesn't fool me.

For me, the scariest candidate running is Hillary, followed closely by Cruz.

I guess this is where being white makes it different for both of us because Trump is inspiring Hitler level propaganda. Under his presidency you can almost guarantee interment camps for Mexicans and Muslims.

 

[Bookworm616]

I guess this is where being white makes it different for both of us because Trump is inspiring Hitler level propaganda. Under his presidency you can almost guarantee interment camps for Mexicans and Muslims.

TDK, you're a smart guy. Do you honestly think Trump will set up internment camps?

Mexicans work on his buildings. He just wants to stop the refugees from entering until a better plan can be found to ensure we don't let in fanatics.

He's NOT the next Hitler. To even think that is asinine. Don't buy what the mainstream media is trying to sell you.

 

[Beasty]

TDK, you're a smart guy. Do you honestly think Trump will set up internment camps?

Mexicans work on his buildings. He just wants to stop the refugees from entering until a better plan can be found to ensure we don't let in fanatics.

He's NOT the next Hitler. To even think that is asinine. Don't buy what the mainstream media is trying to sell you.

Thank you. Although I think Trump would be much worse than Clinton, I totally agree about the media-hitler connection.

I give up, Books. You won't be voting for Clinton. Lol

 

[The Dark King]

TDK, you're a smart guy. Do you honestly think Trump will set up internment camps?

Mexicans work on his buildings. He just wants to stop the refugees from entering until a better plan can be found to ensure we don't let in fanatics.

He's NOT the next Hitler. To even think that is asinine. Don't buy what the mainstream media is trying to sell you.

No but it will emboldened others to do it and he won't do the right thing. He'll keep playing to his base. He's a total coward but a coward with power is the worst kind of dictator

 

[Bookworm616]

Thank you. Although I think Trump would be much worse than Clinton, I totally agree about the media-hitler connection.

I give up, Books. You won't be voting for Clinton. Lol

Nope. LOL. It's #NeverHillary for me.

No but it will emboldened others to do it and he won't do the right thing. He'll keep playing to his base. He's a total coward but a coward with power is the worst kind of dictator

A dictator? Really? That would mean all 3 branches of our government would be dismantled.

TDK, I can't believe you're making me defend Trump, but here I am, defending him. LOL.

Is Trump a buffoon? Yep.

Is Trump evil? Hardly.

Will Trump build a wall? No way.

Will Trump build concentration camps? Hell no.

Trump is a buffoon, but he's not evil. He won't be a dictator, IF he becomes President. He won't.

The one thing that I think is a good trait of Trump's is, as a business man, he knows how to negotiate and since he's had years of experience negotiating with politicians on both sides of the aisle, he has the potential to bring the parties together to do some good in this country. That's like one of only a few positives I see with a Trump presidency.

 

[The Dark King]

Nope. LOL. It's #NeverHillary for me.



A dictator? Really? That would mean all 3 branches of our government would be dismantled.

TDK, I can't believe you're making me defend Trump, but here I am, defending him. LOL.

Is Trump a buffoon? Yep.

Is Trump evil? Hardly.

Will Trump build a wall? No way.

Will Trump build concentration camps? Hell no.

Trump is a buffoon, but he's not evil. He won't be a dictator, IF he becomes President. He won't.

The one thing that I think is a good trait of Trump's is, as a business man, he knows how to negotiate and since he's had years of experience negotiating with politicians on both sides of the aisle, he has the potential to bring the parties together to do some good in this country. That's like one of only a few positives I see with a Trump presidency.

Actually he's a pretty shitty business man he just had a far bigger head start than most that makes him seem way more successful than he really is.
I never said he was a mad genius but I do think his celebrity can possibly put his cowardly ass in a position to play this my way or the highway bs. His ego is massive and will be to the detriment of the people. And you have the luxury of saying he isn't evil because he has no plans to round your people up and treat them like second class citizens. He's not fueling the propaganda machine of hate against people who look like you. If you were Mexican or Muslim I guarantee your song would be different.