There is no contradiction in how these people vote and how they think. They are for accountability for one's actions. That is all. Tonight Obama was talking implementing regulations to keep another housing crisis from happening. Lack of regulation is not what created the mess. You should be smart enough to know when you can and cannot do something. It is not my responsibility to be a wet nurse to an adult. He is the one missing the point. Not me or the Kansan's voting Republican. http://www.google.com/search?client=safari&rls=en&q=is+obama+black+enough&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8
Well, I don't know about concern, but the media most certainly raised questions. A large part of it was based on the fact that Obama was losing the black vote to Hillary Clinton until he won Iowa. It was definitely a racist suggestion wherein the fact that Obama was raised by white grandparents after his white mother died supposedly kept him from connecting with African-Americans. What's funny (funny as in odd not as in "ha-ha") is that Obama went from being "too-white" to "too black" as soon as it looked like he had a legit shot to win the party's nomination. Supposedly Obama's political success proved that we were a "post-racial society," but the evidence proves anything but. Edit: but yeh, I agree that poor people who vote Republican don't seem to get that Republicans are not looking out for their best interest.
That's a bumper sticker, not the reason they vote. And judging by the people they keep sending back to Washington, it's clear they don't give a shit about accountability. O rly? Btw, if it was just subprime loans, we wouldn't have been in deep doo doo. Again, you're repeating talking points. Let's talk again when you can form your own thoughts based on facts and numbers. Ciao!
That seems to be a case of preemptively writing the post-match commentary for the (what was seemingly then) inevitable Clinton victory.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Langford http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rod_Blagojevich [ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x5tXMLI-OsI"]Gradulate the Gator - YouTube[/ame] Its not like the Democrats would ever push legislature under the guise of "everyone deserves to own a home" then sue some banks into lending money to sub-prime candidates then make a shit ton of money off the ensuing bubble before it crashes and nearly brings the world economy to its knees. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/09/30/business/fannie-mae-eases-credit-to-aid-mortgage-lending.html Nor would they ever bailout the people who helped get them elected http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124385428627671889.html then push a bill for the "betterment the planet" that just so happens to spur the sales of their new investment. http://www.snopes.com/politics/gasoline/clunkers.asp I would go into what the republicans have done but the Democrat circle jerk that is this thread has already highlighted the big ones. Personally I don't know how you can point out the corruption in one party without the pot painting the kettle black. By the time you get to the point where you can run for president you have already sold your soul to everyone that helped get you elected. Both parties suck. Neither have your best interest at heart. One uses scare tactics/religion the other uses naive ideals to push legislation that ends up screwing everyone.
The "both sides suck, stop picking on one" argument that someone inevitably trots out in discussions like this is lazy, unproductive and tiresome. You can post all the Wikipedia links and YouTube links you want, but here's the big picture - Republicans have preached accountability and small government and focus on small businesses, and delivered on none of the above. And say what you will about Democrats, they do push labor-friendly policies, and the greatest gains made by the poor and the middle class have come under Democratic administrations.
Here's a bigger picture for you. Neither party gives two sh*ts about you unless you are heading for the ballot booth. Policies are enacted not for the betterment of the people by either party. You may think differently, but look at the people in congress. The only thing they are working towards is getting reelected.
Because they think it's better for society not to be disfunctional and therefore are actually acting in their own long-term interests? You left out the most important and interesting part in that equation: the parents. This is only possible if at least one of your parents also was somewhat interested in what you did in school and did not expose you to the typical social environment of a crack whore. Yeah, but first you have to grow up in a way that you can know that. Compared to 19th century Europe, or communist Europe you guys are still ahead. Nowadays, however, social mobility in many European countries has overtaken social mobility in the US by far. And those are societies that don't value social mobility nearly as much as the American society, but focus on giving livable living conditions for all it's members.
None of this is unreasonable. But, by sheer force if accident, unemployment and debt go up under Republicans, Democrats end up helping the poor and the economy in general. I don't give a shit about intent, I prefer the party with the results.
Um, the US has less mobility than most other developed nations. How does that fact change your anecdote??? It's times like these that I really get the connection between wingnuts and American exceptionalism. They THRIVE on not knowing shit about the rest of the world.
Hey, it's not stanger's fault some Americans don't come from typical WINK WINK NUDGE NUDGE DOGWHISTLE FOGHORN upbringings.
Who's fault is it that they have more to overcome? They do have an "equal" opportunity in the fact that they have access to public schooling, same as my kids do. Too bad we can't choose our parents.
Did you write that with a straight face? Fine, fine, let's assume you're right, that an underfunded, crumbling inner city school provides the same opportunities as a fully-wired, recently-renovated, Ivy League grad-producing suburban school for the sake of this discussion. The rich are still going to have a huge advantage in terms of the networks they can tap into, the risks they can take (think not just college tuition, but the opportunity costs incurred), the networks they can tap into, the simple ability to take unpaid internships, which are pretty much de rigueur for decent careers these days. Yes, there are opportunities, but it takes a lot more than elbow grease, bootsraps and other cliches to even access those opportunities.
I'm to a large extent on stanger's side here. Being born poor in the U.S. ain't all that bad if you're born poor into a stable, education-oriented family with parents who do a good job raising the kids and who are strong role models. Of course the problem is such parents are rare indeed. So yeah, I do think it's largely about what parents you get. Not that Phat doesn't have a point, he certainly does, but the parents are an even bigger factor.
Is Southwestern City Schools equal to New Albany? Nope. But I know you can get an education in the Columbus Public District and you can go to college. People do it every year. I do get where you are going and the way we fund public schools is a problem. The Ohio Supreme Courts have said as much, and I agree with them. I can tell you that, although my local district, Hilliard, doesn't have the means that Dublin and New Albany do, they are still good schools.
Question: Does poverty turn you into a shitty parent? My guess? Maybe. Chicken or the egg and whatnot.
Hmmm, it's not quite shitty vs. nonshitty. My kid played club soccer with a lot of Hispanic kids, most of whom lived in the suburbs. Those parents were as good as the white parents in every way but one. Maybe better, Hispanic families are tight. But damn none of them seemed to care about education. None of their kids are going to college, I mean none of them, except for the few who were recruited by college soccer programs. In 15 years those kids will be making a LOT less than their white club soccer teammates, and I'm saying the #1, #2, and #3 reasons were that their parents did not emphasize getting good grades and going to college.