Political evolution toward liberalism.

ZappasGuitar said:
Here in Texas we have what's called the "Robin Hood" plan regarding our schools. Chapter 41 of the Texas Education Code stated the wealthier school districts pay more into the fund and the less well off school districts pay less.

Chapter 41 of the Texas Education Code makes provisions for certain school districts to share their local tax revenue with other school districts. For the purposes of the school finance system in Texas, districts are designated as either property wealthy or property poor. The relative wealth of the school district is measured in terms of the taxable value of property that lies within the school district borders divided by the number of students in weighted average daily attendance (WADA). Chapter 41's provisions are sometimes referred to as the "share the wealth" or "Robin Hood" plan because districts that are deemed to be property wealthy are required to share their wealth with property-poor school districts. The funds that are distributed by the property-wealthy districts are "recaptured" by the school finance system to assist with financing of public education in school districts that are property poor.


http://www.tea.state.tx.us/index2.aspx?id=6796

Now Texas Righties are trying to do away with the law...proof to back Jarod's claim.
Click to expand...


Actually, that is not proof of his claim. The above states the reverse is currently true.
 
The Dude said:
I personally believe they could win the next election if they picked up the democrat fumble on the issue as a freedom one!
Click to expand...
It would help them... It would prove they can stand up to the money grubbers in defense of liberty.
 
Superfreak said:
Actually, that is not proof of his claim. The above states the reverse is currently true.
Click to expand...

Actually, the numerous attempts by greedy Texas republicans to do away with the rule IS proof of his claim, but even as I searched out the info I never expected you to actually admit as much.

After all, if you did, then you'd have no excuse to keep dodging Jarod's question.
 
Superfreak said:
Anything else you want to whine about? Perhaps you could go on and on and on about being forced to ignore the guy you claim to hate/dislike etc... ???
Click to expand...

Any diversionary tactic you think might work.

That's your basic plan, right?

I left the discussion about ILA in another thread, but that doesn't stop whiners like SF from whining bout it over here.

Later, in another attempt at diversion, he'll blame me for "bringing the ILA BS into this thread."
 
Evolution Indeed

603109_654559207907879_2132743563_n.jpg
 
Jarod said:
I appreciate your honesty, most conservatives would try to pretend they were never against women's rights.
Click to expand...

You just had maineman, Mr. Ultralliberalleftist, say essentially the same thing....he too was against women in the academy...

Yet you, cherry pick ILA's post......talking about women in WEST POINT, you spin that into WOMENS RIGHTS

Thats what we call a L I E.....liar.
 
maineman said:
as a service academy graduate who attended when there were no women, I myself was initially against it. Now I see that women can serve in combat, especially in my branch of the service, every bit as bravely and effectively as men.

I do agree, however, that the 20th century was totally WON by progressive liberalism. The issues that, a hundred years ago, were considered hyper liberal and way on they left bank of our political philosophical spectrum, are now squarely in the middle of the stream. People can say that America is a center-right country, and that may be so, but only because the center of the country today is where the far left of the country was a hundred years ago.
Click to expand...


Very honest maine....it was 40 damn years ago and of course there was just about no place and no reason for women to be in a service academy.....they were by far
the clerk, typist, supply, nurse billets....it was a different world....Brig. General Elizabeth Hoisington in 1970 was totally against women serving in combat rolls in the military....

And now with the advances in technology women do have many many fields to fill that require high academic standards.....

that why Jugheads title is so much bullshit....that was then, this is now. THEN, Every officer in a command position was against women in service academy's....today, women WILL
be put into combat rolls....now there are jobs they can fill.....

And, it certainly wasn't 'evolution' that changed things....it was 'genetic engineering'....the brainwashing of our children in the public schools that caused the change....
and that is still the case....leftist have had the last half century to breed a new American, acclimated into the leftist mindset....
 
NOVA said:
Very honest maine....it was 40 damn years ago and of course there was just about no place and no reason for women to be in a service academy.....they were by far
the clerk, typist, supply, nurse billets....it was a different world....Brig. General Elizabeth Hoisington in 1970 was totally against women serving in combat rolls in the military....

And now with the advances in technology women do have many many fields to fill that require high academic standards.....

that why Jugheads title is so much bullshit....that was then, this is now. THEN, Every officer in a command position was against women in service academy's....today, women WILL
be put into combat rolls....now there are jobs they can fill.....

And, it certainly wasn't 'evolution' that changed things....it was 'genetic engineering'....the brainwashing of our children in the public schools that caused the change....
and that is still the case....leftist have had the last half century to breed a new American, acclimated into the leftist mindset....
Click to expand...
For the non teabaggers he means educated mindset
 
obama-lenin.jpg


So far as anyone has been able to prove, Comrade Khrushchev never said any such thing. But it fits...so...​


http://urbanlegends.about.com/b/2008/11/13/bogus-khrushchev-quote-makes-the-rounds-again.htm
 
NOVA said:
Correct....educated in the liberal doctrine.....

The Communists called them exactly that, 're-education camps'.....same thing
Click to expand...


Its explained to you right here...from the experts.

You can skip it Dude, its far far over your head.
 
Here's the thing though. Most of Europe is beginning to reject Socialism and the Leftist mindset in favor of austerity and Conservative policies.
 
NOVA said:
Very honest maine....it was 40 damn years ago and of course there was just about no place and no reason for women to be in a service academy.....they were by far
the clerk, typist, supply, nurse billets....it was a different world....Brig. General Elizabeth Hoisington in 1970 was totally against women serving in combat rolls in the military....

And now with the advances in technology women do have many many fields to fill that require high academic standards.....

that why Jugheads title is so much bullshit....that was then, this is now. THEN, Every officer in a command position was against women in service academy's....today, women WILL
be put into combat rolls....now there are jobs they can fill.....

And, it certainly wasn't 'evolution' that changed things....it was 'genetic engineering'....the brainwashing of our children in the public schools that caused the change....
and that is still the case....leftist have had the last half century to breed a new American, acclimated into the leftist mindset....
Click to expand...

so it was nasty genetic engineering and brainwashing that opened the doors to women at service academies?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top