The Republican Party and their continuing war on the American Middle Class

Which five?

Go look for yourself, Wheaton and Pepperdine are both in the top 100 schools in the country according to US News, just to get you started.

All I could find was a list of the top 500 Universities in the World and the US had about 200 of those spots and none of those were Wheaton and Pepperdine. If you say so??????

Top 100 Universities in the World | World Top Universities

Try this list.

Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report

By the way, even your list has a Christian college on it, and it is recognized as one of the best research schools in the world. What does that do to your theory that Christians and science do not mix?
 
Less than half NFL players have degrees, so way less than half of draftees have degrees. Just read it from NFL player development exec. NBA is way worse.
 
georgetown, notred dame, boston college, providence, holy cross

those are five universities, the first 3 are in top 45 in country, think the other two fall in top 100.
 
Less than half NFL players have degrees, so way less than half of draftees have degrees. Just read it from NFL player development exec. NBA is way worse.
yeah, I saw that statement too, from another 'answer' site. Along with the participation of post collegate study of at least 175 new students a season, most of those getting a degree at some point during their time in the NFL.

So, we'll amend this. About half of the NFL's players have a degree. Do they hold value? Really, the percentages don't change the underlying premise.
 

you are the hack people say you are....you throw out anything and everything in the hopes you might be right and then put it off on the other person to prove your point.

a direct cite means....words and link....

give me the text that supports your claim or stfu

and genius....not hurting is not the same as helping....

20 ‘‘SEC. 2712. PROHIBITION ON RESCISSIONS.
21 ‘‘A group health plan and a health insurance issuer
22 offering group or individual health insurance coverage
23 shall not rescind such plan or coverage with respect to an
24 enrollee once the enrollee is covered under such plan or
25 coverage involved, except that this section shall not apply
26 to a covered individual who has performed an act or prac17
O:\BAI\BAI09M01.xml [file 1 of 9] S.L.C.
1 tice that constitutes fraud or makes an intentional mis2
representation of material fact as prohibited by the terms
3 of the plan or coverage. Such plan or coverage may not
4 be cancelled except with prior notice to the enrollee, and
5 only as permitted under section 2702(c) or 2742(b).

16 ‘‘SEC. 2714. EXTENSION OF DEPENDENT COVERAGE.
17 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—A group health plan and a health
18 insurance issuer offering group or individual health insur19
ance coverage that provides dependent coverage of chil20
dren shall continue to make such coverage available for
21 an adult child (who is not married) until the child turns
22 26 years of age. Nothing in this section shall require a
23 health plan or a health insurance issuer described in the
24 preceding sentence to make coverage available for a child
25 of a child receiving dependent coverage.

That's two right there. You can find them in the link here with hundreds of others. The summaries offered only a "summery" to make it easier instead of going through the entire bill. You could do a search on the bill. The full bill is published on a hundred sites at least. But, I know, it's more fun to rant about the "black" guy and rant about "hacks" than do the intelligent thing and go "learn".

http://democrats.senate.gov/reform/patient-protection-affordable-care-act.pdf

how exactly does that help the middle class? you haven't explained that....

i'm all for preexisting condition part...however, who pays for it? the middle class....

you didn't do any research or learn anything, you blindly picked out something from a blog and posted it. you are incapable of actually defending it with yoru own words

yawn
 
Go look for yourself, Wheaton and Pepperdine are both in the top 100 schools in the country according to US News, just to get you started.

All I could find was a list of the top 500 Universities in the World and the US had about 200 of those spots and none of those were Wheaton and Pepperdine. If you say so??????

Top 100 Universities in the World | World Top Universities

Try this list.

Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report

By the way, even your list has a Christian college on it, and it is recognized as one of the best research schools in the world. What does that do to your theory that Christians and science do not mix?
Nothing. He'll ignore it, just like he does everything that doesn't fit his incredibly narrow world view.
 
All I could find was a list of the top 500 Universities in the World and the US had about 200 of those spots and none of those were Wheaton and Pepperdine. If you say so??????

Top 100 Universities in the World | World Top Universities

Try this list.

Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report

By the way, even your list has a Christian college on it, and it is recognized as one of the best research schools in the world. What does that do to your theory that Christians and science do not mix?
Nothing. He'll ignore it, just like he does everything that doesn't fit his incredibly narrow world view.

I know, but somewhere in that head of his the evidence keeps piling up. If nothing else happens he will turn into a bitter old man and hate everyone, and I will get my satisfaction that way.
 
All I could find was a list of the top 500 Universities in the World and the US had about 200 of those spots and none of those were Wheaton and Pepperdine. If you say so??????

Top 100 Universities in the World | World Top Universities

Try this list.

Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report

By the way, even your list has a Christian college on it, and it is recognized as one of the best research schools in the world. What does that do to your theory that Christians and science do not mix?
Nothing. He'll ignore it, just like he does everything that doesn't fit his incredibly narrow world view.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hss__LP5B6k&feature]YouTube - ‪SMU Dedman College: Engaging Minds‬‎[/ame]

Dedman College of Humanities and Sciences: Engaging Minds - SMU Dedman College of Humanities & Sciences - SMU

OK, you made me go look. And what did I find?

First off, the reason none of those "religious" universities even showed up in the top 500 in the world, was because of the scoring system. And why was that? The schools in Newsweek were "ranked", not based just on "academic achievement" or "contribution", but on, wait, go read it yourself:

How We Calculate the College Rankings

How We Calculate the College Rankings - US News and World Report

So why did I put that video up there from number 68 ranked Southern Methodist University? Watch it. This video is describing their "science department". First, they don't mention science until nearly 2:20 minutes into a four minute video.

Second, they use as an example, insulin for a diabetic. Biology, physiology, botany? You know they are trying to leave out as much as possible to avoid the "E" word, evolution.

Because Notre Dame is Catholic, at least they fully teach science. When entire branches of science are left out because it interferes with Religious dogma, then the entire school is suspect. Real education doesn't have a "slant". Conservatives feel that liberal teaching is "biased" because liberals leave out "voodoo".
 
No way near on MBA, I wouldn't bet against you on NFL. What makes your degree better than theirs?
Who said I was bagging on their degrees or saying that I had a better one? I'm not the one worshiping at the alter of the university. Rdean is.
 
Reagan had the advantage of a middle class that had not been destroyed by 30 years of his policies. He inherited a solvent middle class -- one that was still experiencing the benefits of postwar capitalism, which not only ensured both an affordable cost of living for the masses and support for labor, but was regulated on behalf of the consumer (not rigged on behalf of no-bid transnationals). This was before everything was hyper-privatized; before defense/energy/pharma/insurance were turned into quasi monopolies which directed profits not to solid American jobs but elections, in order to staff government for the purpose of capturing legislators and regulators. Indeed, Reagan, who was famous for claiming that business should run government, replaced representative Democracy (built around individual citizens and votes) with pay-to-play politics (built around lobbyists and money).

Reagan got rid of the entire infrastructure of middle class support so he could move resources to his military and corporate welfare agenda. The result was historic deficits. He was the first president to completely abandon "pay as you go". But it gets worse: he convinced a generation of Republicans to ignore debt and deficits on behalf of military adventurism and unfunded tax cuts. [Remember when Chaney famously quipped "deficits don't matter". He was literally parakeeting Reagan's new way of government. Point is: the neoliberal agenda of military expansion, from the Gipper's Cold War to W's War on Terrorism, ain't cheap. The new GOP doesn't just want a centralized domestic government (which listens to phone calls and issues biometric ID cards), rather it wants Washington to control the global economy, that is, the current Republican party believes in centralization on steroids, i.e., they want to rebuild whole Arab nations. Welcome to bankruptcy GOP style. It's Johnson's Great Society not just for the people of Milwaukee and Syracuse, but West Asia. They want to spread freedom and utopia to the entire globe. Wow, just wow]

[Funny how Ronnie went to congress twice, hat in hand, to get the legal debt limit of the federal government raised. Star Wars ain't cheap Bro Nameth. Ronnie was a true fiscal nightmare. Carter, on the other hand, paid for Vietnam. Had he been Reagan (or W), he would have quietly moved the debt to our grandchildren]

But here is my point about the solvent middle class Ronnie inherited. The late postwar middle class was not yet in terrible debt. Their homes were still worth something. They had pensions and savings and health care and heavily subsidized public universities. That is, they still enjoyed a measure of the protections and benefits that came from 40 years of progressive legislative and judicial hegemony. My point: they were still solvent enough to borrow. So when Reagan's war on labor started to take hold and the solid jobs never trickled down as promised, the Gipper worked with big finance to build the modern credit economy. Indeed, Reagan lead America's transition from a powerful manufacturing economy (built around protected jobs and protected markets) to a materialistic consumption economy (built around free trade, disappearing jobs, and Master Cards). Which is to say, when Reagan's economic ideas turned out to be a trojan horse for the export of solid middle class jobs, he quietly built a nation of deficit spenders (because he needed to fuel consumption with something). He put "Morning in America" on Visa. He ran your consumption economy like he ran government, using creatively hidden debt and massive deficits. America went on a 30 year spending spree which ended in a disaster that will consume generations.

America swallowed fiscal poison in 1980. The Reagan war on labor destroyed the great bulk of consumers in order to enrich the few: he destroyed the very demand needed to drive the economy (which is why America turned to bubbles and credit). Point is: middle class consumption is necessary; therefore, the middle class must be maintained like a bridge or road, that is, commerce is impossible without their spending (spending not borrowing). You can't globalize their jobs out of existence, nor can you get rid of their affordable education and benefits in order to give tax breaks (AKA Wall Street casino money) to the wealthy. The middle class is too big to fail. You are learning this lesson the hard way. Massive amounts of money ran up the ladder... and disappeared into speculative bubble'nomics (as opposed to the real economy), decadent lifestyles, and dynastic inheritances. It never trickled down and you are lying in the bed. Turns out, the voodoo is on you.

You got punk'd by a "B" rate actor.
 
Last edited:
Try this list.

Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report

By the way, even your list has a Christian college on it, and it is recognized as one of the best research schools in the world. What does that do to your theory that Christians and science do not mix?
Nothing. He'll ignore it, just like he does everything that doesn't fit his incredibly narrow world view.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hss__LP5B6k&feature"]YouTube - ‪SMU Dedman College: Engaging Minds‬‎[/ame]

Dedman College of Humanities and Sciences: Engaging Minds - SMU Dedman College of Humanities & Sciences - SMU

OK, you made me go look. And what did I find?

First off, the reason none of those "religious" universities even showed up in the top 500 in the world, was because of the scoring system. And why was that? The schools in Newsweek were "ranked", not based just on "academic achievement" or "contribution", but on, wait, go read it yourself:

How We Calculate the College Rankings

How We Calculate the College Rankings - US News and World Report

So why did I put that video up there from number 68 ranked Southern Methodist University? Watch it. This video is describing their "science department". First, they don't mention science until nearly 2:20 minutes into a four minute video.

Second, they use as an example, insulin for a diabetic. Biology, physiology, botany? You know they are trying to leave out as much as possible to avoid the "E" word, evolution.

Because Notre Dame is Catholic, at least they fully teach science. When entire branches of science are left out because it interferes with Religious dogma, then the entire school is suspect. Real education doesn't have a "slant". Conservatives feel that liberal teaching is "biased" because liberals leave out "voodoo".

None of the Christian schools are in the top 500? I pointed out two, and Emory University is in the link you provided. I could look at it closer and see if any other christian schools are on it if you want.

Then you try to convince me that a college recruitment video proves the school is not about science because it waits until halfway through it to mention science. Let me try to explain this to you in simple words.

Recruitment videos like this are aimed at students that are already sold on the academic merits of the school, so they are designed to show the campus in the best light possible, and sell the students, and parents, on the entire school. They are not just aimed at science students.

BTW, I saw, and heard, science mentioned in the first minute, so maybe you should pay more attention.

As for your ridiculous claim that they do not mention evolution, they have an accredited course of study in biology and biochemistry.

Dedman College - Courses of Study - Course Catalogs - SMU

Only a total idiot like you would think that they could offer an accredited science curriculum and not mention evolution. Want to retract that stupidity or do you stand by it in the face of reality.

All education has a slant, and one of the few choices we have is what to do with that slant. You decided to use it to build a fortress, which is sad and pathetic.
 

Forum List

Back
Top