Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Aren't conservatives against public schools altogether?
Yes, but most of them at least have enough brain cells not to declare so openly, because they know it's lunacy.
Public Schools are the most prominent example of socialism we have in this country. Conservatives almost universally are opposed to ANYTHING socialist (except the military)
...therefore, yes, of course they are opposed to the public schools.
If Conservatives were ever able to get into real power (which thank goodness they never will) they would get rid of public schools altogether.
You have to realize that the lunacy of conservatism sometimes doesn't show itself that well, but that's only because they rarely if ever get enough power to actually implement their agenda.
Correlation does not suggest causation. In this case, bucs is right. Liberals are generally more intelligent than conservatives; Liberals tend to be pro-union. Hence, there is a noticeable correlation, but it is not necessarily because one causes the other.
That is bullshit. Pure. Simple. Bullshit.
You have a Wisconsin governor who is fiscally irresponsible and sent the state and its people into a black hole, and then you say liberals failed "massively?" LMAO!!! Your an imbecile.
Let me try to explain to you what your teacher failed to splain.. "Your" is a possessive as in "your ass" your ass belongs to you. You're an imbecile is descriptive and a combination of the words "you" and "are". Do you think you can remember this for more than 5 seconds being that you as a liberal "tend to be generally more intelligent than a conservative"?
I'm still trying to get my head around the thought process that concludes that a union who's sole purpose is to protect it's members somehow produces better education. There's no limit to the intellectual dishonesty of these folks. Perhaps they're not quite as smart as they think.
Correlation does not suggest causation. In this case, bucs is right. Liberals are generally more intelligent than conservatives; Liberals tend to be pro-union. Hence, there is a noticeable correlation, but it is not necessarily because one causes the other.
Yes, I'm sure you are,, and this explains the massive failures in unionized liberalland how exactly?
You have a Wisconsin governor who is fiscally irresponsible and sent the state and its people into a black hole, and then you say liberals failed "massively?" LMAO!!! Your an imbecile.
In six weeks he managed to destroy a state?
Hey Cuyo.... I thought you said liberals are generally more intelligent than conservatives.... where the fuck are the smart liberals? Because Shittoe here is lowering the collective IQ of liberals disproportionately.
Correlation does not suggest causation. In this case, bucs is right. Liberals are generally more intelligent than conservatives; Liberals tend to be pro-union. Hence, there is a noticeable correlation, but it is not necessarily because one causes the other.
That is bullshit. Pure. Simple. Bullshit.
ummm... I'm sorry if it's incompatible with your POV, but it's a fact. It's been true throughout history.
edit: Perhaps it would be more proper to say that intelligent people tend to be more liberal. Back to the causation vs. correlation argument.
Let me try to explain to you what your teacher failed to splain.. "Your" is a possessive as in "your ass" your ass belongs to you. You're an imbecile is descriptive and a combination of the words "you" and "are". Do you think you can remember this for more than 5 seconds being that you as a liberal "tend to be generally more intelligent than a conservative"?
I'm still trying to get my head around the thought process that concludes that a union who's sole purpose is to protect it's members somehow produces better education. There's no limit to the intellectual dishonesty of these folks. Perhaps they're not quite as smart as they think.
Let me help you. The sole function of a union is to negotiate better working conditions - including salary, benefits, work rules, job security - for its members.
The better the working conditions are, the more attractive the job is. The more attractive the job is,
the more likely it is to attract a better quality of person to do the job. Much work and cost goes into qualifying to be a teacher; if the same amount of work and cost can qualify a person for a better job with better of the above,
that person may not choose teaching.
It's a simple exercise in market forces.
If you care about the quality of person you get into the teaching profession, then you have to be willing to compete for that quality. A teaching job with relatively low pay, benefits, job security, etc., is not competitive.
That is bullshit. Pure. Simple. Bullshit.
ummm... I'm sorry if it's incompatible with your POV, but it's a fact. It's been true throughout history.
edit: Perhaps it would be more proper to say that intelligent people tend to be more liberal. Back to the causation vs. correlation argument.
the more educated people are the more liberal they tend to be, that is fact.
Let me try to explain to you what your teacher failed to splain.. "Your" is a possessive as in "your ass" your ass belongs to you. You're an imbecile is descriptive and a combination of the words "you" and "are". Do you think you can remember this for more than 5 seconds being that you as a liberal "tend to be generally more intelligent than a conservative"?
I'm still trying to get my head around the thought process that concludes that a union who's sole purpose is to protect it's members somehow produces better education. There's no limit to the intellectual dishonesty of these folks. Perhaps they're not quite as smart as they think.
Let me help you. The sole function of a union is to negotiate better working conditions - including salary, benefits, work rules, job security - for its members.
The better the working conditions are, the more attractive the job is. The more attractive the job is,
the more likely it is to attract a better quality of person to do the job. Much work and cost goes into qualifying to be a teacher; if the same amount of work and cost can qualify a person for a better job with better of the above,
that person may not choose teaching.
It's a simple exercise in market forces.
If you care about the quality of person you get into the teaching profession, then you have to be willing to compete for that quality. A teaching job with relatively low pay, benefits, job security, etc., is not competitive.
ummm... I'm sorry if it's incompatible with your POV, but it's a fact. It's been true throughout history.
edit: Perhaps it would be more proper to say that intelligent people tend to be more liberal. Back to the causation vs. correlation argument.
the more educated people are the more liberal they tend to be, that is fact.
Both IQ and level of formal education are inversely related to the predisposition to conservatism. It's not a question, debate, or opinion, guys, it's just the way it is.
I'm still trying to get my head around the thought process that concludes that a union who's sole purpose is to protect it's members somehow produces better education. There's no limit to the intellectual dishonesty of these folks. Perhaps they're not quite as smart as they think.
Let me help you. The sole function of a union is to negotiate better working conditions - including salary, benefits, work rules, job security - for its members.
The better the working conditions are, the more attractive the job is. The more attractive the job is,
the more likely it is to attract a better quality of person to do the job. Much work and cost goes into qualifying to be a teacher; if the same amount of work and cost can qualify a person for a better job with better of the above,
that person may not choose teaching.
It's a simple exercise in market forces.
If you care about the quality of person you get into the teaching profession, then you have to be willing to compete for that quality. A teaching job with relatively low pay, benefits, job security, etc., is not competitive.
Bullshit. Teachers unions exist to protect substandard teachers in declining and corrupt public school systems.
Private and Parochial schools deliver better education, at a lower cost and guess what? The teachers aren't unionized.
Let me help you. The sole function of a union is to negotiate better working conditions - including salary, benefits, work rules, job security - for its members.
The better the working conditions are, the more attractive the job is. The more attractive the job is,
the more likely it is to attract a better quality of person to do the job. Much work and cost goes into qualifying to be a teacher; if the same amount of work and cost can qualify a person for a better job with better of the above,
that person may not choose teaching.
It's a simple exercise in market forces.
If you care about the quality of person you get into the teaching profession, then you have to be willing to compete for that quality. A teaching job with relatively low pay, benefits, job security, etc., is not competitive.
Bullshit. Teachers unions exist to protect substandard teachers in declining and corrupt public school systems.
Private and Parochial schools deliver better education, at a lower cost and guess what? The teachers aren't unionized.
Teachers unions exist only to protect the substandard teachers in them?
BULLSHIT.
that is like saying that the Catholic religion only exists to protect pedophile priests.
Which is also BS.
the more educated people are the more liberal they tend to be, that is fact.
Both IQ and level of formal education are inversely related to the predisposition to conservatism. It's not a question, debate, or opinion, guys, it's just the way it is.
Why because an absolute retard such as yourself says so? Your posts totally contradict your absurd claim.
Both IQ and level of formal education are inversely related to the predisposition to conservatism. It's not a question, debate, or opinion, guys, it's just the way it is.
Why because an absolute retard such as yourself says so? Your posts totally contradict your absurd claim.
Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight. You're just a shining example of right wing intelligence, aren't you?
There are exceptions of course, as there are to every rule. You, my really dimwitted but possibly well-intentioned friend, are not one of them.
I think due to personal responsibility that each parent should bear the full cost of educating their child.
My property taxes would drop by over 50%
Aren't conservatives against public schools altogether?
Yes, but most of them at least have enough brain cells not to declare so openly, because they know it's lunacy.
Public Schools are the most prominent example of socialism we have in this country. Conservatives almost universally are opposed to ANYTHING socialist (except the military)
...therefore, yes, of course they are opposed to the public schools.
If Conservatives were ever able to get into real power (which thank goodness they never will) they would get rid of public schools altogether.
You have to realize that the lunacy of conservatism sometimes doesn't show itself that well, but that's only because they rarely if ever get enough power to actually implement their agenda.
