You should explain:
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
to him.
BIG controversy over Obama's speech to kids
- Thread starter Shalimar
- Start date
The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
to him.
truuuuuuuuu
So here is what the president's speech says:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/MediaResources/PreparedSchoolRemarks/
HE'S TELLING KIDS TO STAY IN SCHOOL AND RESPECT PEOPLE WHO ARE BROWNER THEN THEY ARE!!!! WHAT A TERRORIST!!!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/MediaResources/PreparedSchoolRemarks/
HE'S TELLING KIDS TO STAY IN SCHOOL AND RESPECT PEOPLE WHO ARE BROWNER THEN THEY ARE!!!! WHAT A TERRORIST!!!
Meh, nothing objectionable, though I have always despised his public speaking cause it follows a pretty clear template: lots of verbs about action and doing stuff -> someone/thing is preventing me from doing those things -> I had a bad chilhood -> black powar.
he tried to tell kids to stay in school and lead good lives! clearly he has no soul or conscience
Amstel
The Hoarse Whisperer
So, what? Because there was an issue raised by democrats in office EIGHTEEN YEARS and FOUR PRESIDENTIAL TERMS ago, we should be good with all this lame ass rhetorical bullshit the right is spewing out now about Obama making this a political agenda stage?
Hard to tell even what point you are making, because just a link and no explanation is a tool we have seen used around here too many times, amazingly, by right wing posters.
I wonder if Obama's speech will be anything like Reagan's speech.
November 14, 1988. Reagan addresses and accepts questions from students of four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building.
During the question-and-answer portion of the event, Reagan returned to the topic, this time telling the students that lowering taxes increases revenue:
Q: My name is Cam Fitzie and I'm from St. Agnes School in Alexandria, Virginia. I was wondering if you think that it is possible to decrease the national debt without raising the taxes of the public?
PRESIDENT REAGAN: I do. That's a big argument that's going on in government and I definitely believe it is because one of the principle reasons that we were able to get the economy back on track and create those new jobs and all was we cut the taxes, we reduced them. Because you see, the taxes can be such a penalty on people that there's no incentive for them to prosper and to earn more and so forth because they have to give so much to the government. And what we have found is that at the lower rates the government gets more revenue, there are more people paying taxes because there are more people with jobs and there are more people willing to earn more money because they get to keep a bigger share of it, so today, we're getting more revenue at the lower rates than we were at the higher. And do you know something? I studied economics in college when I was young and I learned there about a man named Ibn Khaldun, who lived 1200 years ago in Egypt. And 1200 years ago he said, in the beginning of the empire, the rates were low, the tax rates were low, but the revenue was great. He said in the end of empire, when the empire was collapsing, the rates were great and the revenue was low.
November 14, 1988. Reagan addresses and accepts questions from students of four area middle schools in the Old Executive Office Building.
During the question-and-answer portion of the event, Reagan returned to the topic, this time telling the students that lowering taxes increases revenue:
Q: My name is Cam Fitzie and I'm from St. Agnes School in Alexandria, Virginia. I was wondering if you think that it is possible to decrease the national debt without raising the taxes of the public?
PRESIDENT REAGAN: I do. That's a big argument that's going on in government and I definitely believe it is because one of the principle reasons that we were able to get the economy back on track and create those new jobs and all was we cut the taxes, we reduced them. Because you see, the taxes can be such a penalty on people that there's no incentive for them to prosper and to earn more and so forth because they have to give so much to the government. And what we have found is that at the lower rates the government gets more revenue, there are more people paying taxes because there are more people with jobs and there are more people willing to earn more money because they get to keep a bigger share of it, so today, we're getting more revenue at the lower rates than we were at the higher. And do you know something? I studied economics in college when I was young and I learned there about a man named Ibn Khaldun, who lived 1200 years ago in Egypt. And 1200 years ago he said, in the beginning of the empire, the rates were low, the tax rates were low, but the revenue was great. He said in the end of empire, when the empire was collapsing, the rates were great and the revenue was low.
the highest marginal tax rate in 1962 was 91%. 91! you can't compare tax cuts then to tax cuts now.
that's preposterous. you can't even begin to shelter your child to that extent. it's a big world out there. you have to prepare them to be critical thinkers, not to take everything said to them at face value.
Amstel
The Hoarse Whisperer
now come on. how about something actually substantive, like, this is how both sides keep each other in check.
Or, is the 'i know you are but what am I' a tool used many times, amazingly, by left wing posters?
I don't think party should come into play at all regardless...I'd say the same if people were protesting Bush speaking to school kids
Amstel
The Hoarse Whisperer
