We use to teach our children

[LoneLaugher]

Fuck your values. Mine are better.

 

[Seawytch]

Now we are only telling them what to parrot back and not teaching them how to think, for the last 40 years.

Cartoon made in 1959.
Cartoon predicts the future 50 years ago. This is amazing insight! - YouTube

Great post! So true. I'm old enough to remember the David and Goliath shows too....they taught values. Now they all seem to have these little black boxes they all stare into and communicate with. Soon the art of speaking might be gone.

Wait...you're talking about watching a TV show, while typing on one of those "little boxes"...or the typewriter with the TV on it for the geezers...and lamenting about "kids these days"?

Funny, when I was a kid we had these things called "parents" that taught the values. In our family we still do.

Oh, and we had these things called "books" too. Oh look, still do. In fact, that's what my kids use their "little boxes" for quite a bit.

 

[Avatar4321]

What? Are you trying in your lame way to lob an insult?

You are an imbecile. A polite one....but still an imbecile. Would you like some attention? I'll try......but you are so boring that it isn't even fun to mock you.

Just stating facts. If you take them as insults, that's fine.

Fact is you can't run circles around someone in a discussion, I doubt your children can, though I hope for their sakes they learn.

Oh! You are brutal! Please stop! You are tearing me apart.

There are a few people here who can own me anytime they want. You ain't one of them. You are way, way down on the list. You should learn your place...it would lead to a more meaningful experience for you.

Are you joking? Maybe TM or rdean can't own you. (Who knows, you guys agree on so much) But everyone else does and does so frequently. I'd love to see you contribute more substance one of these days.

 

[Avatar4321]

Hmmmm.

More taxes for ever-increasing budgets. To pay for ever-increasing government services. And yet, magically, government has not intruded into our lives more.

It's a Christmas miracle, Comrade!



.

Not really the miracle I was hoping for.

 

[Avatar4321]

Saying that the Supreme Court should follow the Constitution as written is really stupid. That is not what they do. They interpret the fucking thing.

I am convinced that those who call for such a thing.......for "following the Constitution as it was written because the words mean exactly the same as they did in the 18th century"....are doing nothing but trying to mask their own ignorance.

So you think that the Constitution suddenly changes meaning because you want to say a word means something it didn't mean when written?

Why not just be honest about what the Constitution says. What it means and stop trying to manipulate things for political reasons?

Is it too much to even try to eliminate corruption in our system?

 

[craner]

Now we are only telling them what to parrot back and not teaching them how to think, for the last 40 years.

Cartoon made in 1959.
Cartoon predicts the future 50 years ago. This is amazing insight! - YouTube

Great post! So true. I'm old enough to remember the David and Goliath shows too....they taught values. Now they all seem to have these little black boxes they all stare into and communicate with. Soon the art of speaking might be gone.

Wait...you're talking about watching a TV show, while typing on one of those "little boxes"...or the typewriter with the TV on it for the geezers...and lamenting about "kids these days"?

Funny, when I was a kid we had these things called "parents" that taught the values. In our family we still do.

Oh, and we had these things called "books" too. Oh look, still do. In fact, that's what my kids use their little boxes" for quite a bit.

Of course parents are the main source of values!! I'm only responding to the subject here which I took as being about what kids watch today......and I'm not watching TV right now, I'm at work doing this while monitoring the Plant computer. You dont see a problem with kids doing most of their communicating through a little black box instead of interacting personally? Well we'll see I guess.

 

[Seawytch]

Great post! So true. I'm old enough to remember the David and Goliath shows too....they taught values. Now they all seem to have these little black boxes they all stare into and communicate with. Soon the art of speaking might be gone.

Wait...you're talking about watching a TV show, while typing on one of those "little boxes"...or the typewriter with the TV on it for the geezers...and lamenting about "kids these days"?

Funny, when I was a kid we had these things called "parents" that taught the values. In our family we still do.

Oh, and we had these things called "books" too. Oh look, still do. In fact, that's what my kids use their little boxes" for quite a bit.

Of course parents are the main source of values!! I'm only responding to the subject here which I took as being about what kids watch today......and I'm not watching TV right now, I'm at work doing this while monitoring the Plant computer. You dont see a problem with kids doing most of their communicating through a little black box instead of interacting personally? Well we'll see I guess.

TV isn't meant for imparting values, it's for entertainment. What is so horrible about what "kids are watching" today?

I wasn't implying you we're watching TV. You were talking about watching TV as a kid while implying kids are too into "little boxes". Seemed a little "kids these days".

Why aren't you talking with your co-workers instead of conversing here? Get the irony?

 

[Avatar4321]

Are you joking? Maybe TM or rdean can't own you. (Who knows, you guys agree on so much) But everyone else does and does so frequently. I'd love to see you contribute more substance one of these days.

You know what. I apologize. I'm letting myself get caught into pointless fighting. I shouldn't put you or anyone else down. I need to catch myself better in the future.

 

[Avatar4321]

TV isn't meant for imparting values, it's for entertainment. What is so horrible about what "kids are watching" today?

I wasn't implying you we're watching TV. You were talking about watching TV as a kid while implying kids are too into "little boxes". Seemed a little "kids these days".

Why aren't you talking with your co-workers instead of conversing here? Get the irony?

And yet it does impart values. And the producers in Hollywood have known that for decades. Which is precisely why they try to influence people through their programming.

 

[del]

davey, if god loves us, why don't we have any knees?​

 

[OKTexas]

Fuck your values. Mine are better.

I thank you for that, if I can't get a fuck you from a commiecrat I don't feel I did my job. How's it feel to be owned?

 

[del]

^

hates *maobama*

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No you got me wrong on that, I could care less about the courts tenure, I want them to follow the constitution as written, not as they feel it should be applied. The concept is simple, the Constitution means exactly the same today as the day it was written, if folks don't like what it says, then apply article 5, that is the path to a living Constitution, constitutionally there is none other. I'm damned tried of all 3 branches ignoring the Constitution except to bolster a political arguement, it is the law, I say stick to it.

By deferring to amendment often you are negating the Constitutional duty of the SCOTUS to act as a check and balance of the other two. The SCOTUS prevents the Executive from overreach or enables extension of that power. They also make sure that the Congress doesn't impose unconstitutional measures on the states or the Executive...which groups of boneheads try to do from time to time.

If the states want a law their own legislatures enact it for review by their own Supreme Courts and it may or may not need SCOTUS review eventually.

It isn't constitutional to use the power to accept or reject Amendments as a replacement for the duty of the SCOTUS to check and balance. It is a usurpation of Constitutionally protected powers.

Amemding the Constitution was made difficult in order to protect from rule by force of numbers rather than force of law.

The same gridlock as in Congress purposely imposed on our Courts serves no one. Americans deserve the laws they want that pass Constitutional muster.

Regards from Rosie

What!!!!!!!

Your going in directions that haven't thus far entered in this conversation. I'm saying that the SCOTUS is bound to follow the Constitution as written. It is SCOTUS that is userping powers by giving themselves and the other two branches powers that are NOT enumerated in the Constitution. What SCOTUS thinks does not alter what is written, yet they have on numerous occasions expanded the powers of government with only imagined authority. Moabamacare was just the latest one, direct taxiation is forbidden by article 1, section 9, the 16 admendment created an exception for income, nothing else. Now SCOTUS says a direct tax can be levied for doing nothing, that authority does not exist I don't care who wrote it, who passed it or who signed it. On top of everything Roberts took it upon himself to redefine the language in the legislation which he does not have the authority to do. He should have sent it back to congress with a note, that as written, it was unconstitutional.

The Constitution affords Congress powers both enumerated and implied – the Framers understood the doctrine of judicial review and fully expected the courts to examine the constitutionality of measures both Federal and local.

Indeed, judicial review was commonplace in Colonial courts for well over a generation prior to and during the Foundation Era.

The Framers also understood and expected the courts to interpret the Constitution and determine its meaning, establishing case law to guide future generations of jurists.

Moabamacare

This would indicate your opposition to the ACA is subjective and partisan, not legal; or otherwise not predicated on a rational analysis of the ruling.

 

[OKTexas]

By deferring to amendment often you are negating the Constitutional duty of the SCOTUS to act as a check and balance of the other two. The SCOTUS prevents the Executive from overreach or enables extension of that power. They also make sure that the Congress doesn't impose unconstitutional measures on the states or the Executive...which groups of boneheads try to do from time to time.

If the states want a law their own legislatures enact it for review by their own Supreme Courts and it may or may not need SCOTUS review eventually.

It isn't constitutional to use the power to accept or reject Amendments as a replacement for the duty of the SCOTUS to check and balance. It is a usurpation of Constitutionally protected powers.

Amemding the Constitution was made difficult in order to protect from rule by force of numbers rather than force of law.

The same gridlock as in Congress purposely imposed on our Courts serves no one. Americans deserve the laws they want that pass Constitutional muster.

Regards from Rosie

What!!!!!!!

Your going in directions that haven't thus far entered in this conversation. I'm saying that the SCOTUS is bound to follow the Constitution as written. It is SCOTUS that is userping powers by giving themselves and the other two branches powers that are NOT enumerated in the Constitution. What SCOTUS thinks does not alter what is written, yet they have on numerous occasions expanded the powers of government with only imagined authority. Moabamacare was just the latest one, direct taxiation is forbidden by article 1, section 9, the 16 admendment created an exception for income, nothing else. Now SCOTUS says a direct tax can be levied for doing nothing, that authority does not exist I don't care who wrote it, who passed it or who signed it. On top of everything Roberts took it upon himself to redefine the language in the legislation which he does not have the authority to do. He should have sent it back to congress with a note, that as written, it was unconstitutional.

The Constitution affords Congress powers both enumerated and implied – the Framers understood the doctrine of judicial review and fully expected the courts to examine the constitutionality of measures both Federal and local.

Indeed, judicial review was commonplace in Colonial courts for well over a generation prior to and during the Foundation Era.

The Framers also understood and expected the courts to interpret the Constitution and determine its meaning, establishing case law to guide future generations of jurists.

Moabamacare

This would indicate your opposition to the ACA is subjective and partisan, not legal; or otherwise not predicated on a rational analysis of the ruling.

First, anytime you think you see an implyed power in the Constitution refer to the 10th admendment. It plainly states only the enumerated powers were confered to the federal government, all others were reserved to the states or the people.

The fact that I don't like Maobamacare, doesn't defeat my constitutional arguement against it. I would welcome a discussion if you so chose. You might want to read the majority opinion before you start.

 

[RosieS]

^^^
what he says! (C_Clayton)

Regards from Rosie

 

[Uncensored2008]

Fuck your values. Mine are better.

You have no values - nor any value.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Wait...you're talking about watching a TV show, while typing on one of those "little boxes"...or the typewriter with the TV on it for the geezers...and lamenting about "kids these days"?

Funny, when I was a kid we had these things called "parents" that taught the values. In our family we still do.

Oh, and we had these things called "books" too. Oh look, still do. In fact, that's what my kids use their "little boxes" for quite a bit.

"Values" like; "Kill babies," "Lie for Obama," "There is no right or wrong, only the party?"

You of the left are utterly devoid of integrity. How can you have "values" with no integrity?

 

[Moonglow]

When I was in school during the 60's and 70's we were taught algebra in the 8th grade. My first son started to learn algebra in the 6h grade, now my 10 year old is learning algebra and he is in the 4th grade. If you think children are not being taught, you should get out from under the rock you live under.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Just stating facts. If you take them as insults, that's fine.

Fact is you can't run circles around someone in a discussion, I doubt your children can, though I hope for their sakes they learn.

Oh! You are brutal! Please stop! You are tearing me apart.

There are a few people here who can own me anytime they want. You ain't one of them. You are way, way down on the list. You should learn your place...it would lead to a more meaningful experience for you.

Are you joking? Maybe TM or rdean can't own you. (Who knows, you guys agree on so much) But everyone else does and does so frequently. I'd love to see you contribute more substance one of these days.

Good luck with that...