Just watched Ron Paul on Meet the Press

fly said:
No, but it was. It may not be anymore, but thats simply because abolishing the FBI and CIA is an idiotic idea. -WAFFLER- Don't give me that BS about there being more oversight now either while they perform warrantless wiretaps and have secret prisons around the world.
Click to expand...

It was and you're still misrepresenting the idea. He is not against foreign intelligence gathering. He has made no mention of the DIA despite the fact that it has a much larger budget and conducts far more intelligence operations around the world because not only is its design and organization perfectly constitutional but it's under authority of the department of defense and thus has far more accountability than the CIA.

Abolishing those agencies was not an idiotic idea. They're bad now but they were AWFUL thirty years ago. That very thing about the secret prisons is one of the reasons he wants a change.

Why the hell would anyone think change is a bad thing in this arena?
 
Last edited:
147755785810fa.jpg
 
FlyNavy said:
But they're not. When states are in control of the education system the people of those states are better able to control the quality. What makes you think the federal government has improved any of the problems you mentioned?

Even the No Child Left Behind program has made things worse because schools that don't score as well get less money.And that major change would be to give control back to the states. The DoE has been in control since 1979 and education in America has only gotten worse. They haven't improved anything. At best all they've done is wasted money and at worse they've actually caused the decline.

Cities and states aren't the ones making those bad decisions you're talking about. That's the fed responsible for making everyone believe that somehow money is the problem. Again, private schools offer better education for less money per student. School choice should be implemented to foster competition among the public institutions but at the very least the states should have control of it.

Why? Because it's the law of the land. If the country feels that the federal government should have authority over education (and it won't, there are way too many states out there that know they could do a much better job) then there should be a constitutional amendment to make it legal. Anything less is subverting the very principles of our government's framework.

Breaking the cycles of poverty is great but you can't do that by giving those in poverty government checks and you can't improve education by giving control of a school in LA to a politician three thousand miles away in DC.

[youtubevid]Bx4pN-aiofw[/youtubevid]
Click to expand...

The state isn't doing much to help, at least not around here. I don't know if you heard of Prop 13 or the two dozen or so other state laws like it, but it basically caps property taxes, thus cutting deeply into school funding. The basic reason is because a huge number of retarded baby boomers decided they're checking out so they'd rather not play anymore, and didn't want to continue supporting the costs of education. Apparently they didn't realize that education is a keystone to keeping your city a good place and your society running well. Oh well, they'll be almost dead by the time it really hits. Jackasses.

Of course the issue of education isn't just as simple as funding. But funding is part of it, and after prop 13 the schools began to tailspin as class sizes rose and schools were unable to keep their facilities current and in good repair. And then in Compton, what little money there was going in was being embezzled by the local school system. The principal of the local HS drove a Jaguar when there wasn't a single computer in the whole school. The city had a $55,000 salaried Vice Superintendent of Towels. The place remains the crime-infested shithole you'd imagine it would be.

Meanwhile, down the street in Santa Ana, KidWorks is supported by a federal (pork barrel, yes) grant (and donations) and is actually turning around the educational nature of the area. Their dropout rates, illiteracy rates, crime rates, and poverty rates have all dropped. More of them are going to college, and more of the ones that go to college are coming back. All that KidWorks does is what any goddamn school should do, and they do it in 2 hours after school. They have few kids per staff, an emphasis on real skill learning, a well-maintained facility, and a computer lab. And I've seen over and over how it turns around the lives of kids.

Turning to a more theoretical level -- the simple fact is that nobody cares about local or state politics. The reason why the DoE has taken more control is because it was the only way to have education move and adapt in the modern American landscape. Do you have any idea how low the turnout rate is for city/county elections? Hell even the state elections don't fetch good turnout around here. Hell even the presidential election in America is pathetic! Don't kid yourself that it's going to change, either. The city and state politicians know that they can die in office if they just don't rock the boat. Any real change that happens is going to come from the federal level.
 
FlyNavy said:
It was and you're still misrepresenting the idea. He is not against foreign intelligence gathering.
Click to expand...

Where did I say that? Misdirection?

He has made no mention of the DIA despite the fact that it has a much larger budget and conducts far more intelligence operations around the world because not only is its design and organization perfectly constitutional but it's under authority of the department of defense and thus has far more accountability than the CIA.
Click to expand...

Misdirection?

Abolishing those agencies was not an idiotic idea. They're bad now but they were AWFUL thirty years ago.
Click to expand...

If they are still so bad, why doesn't he want to 'abolish' them anymore. BTW, lets take a minute to look up the word abolish.

Main Entry:
abol·ish Listen to the pronunciation of abolish
Pronunciation:
ə-ˈbä-lish
Function:
transitive verb
Etymology:
Middle English abolisshen, from Middle French aboliss-, stem of abolir, from Latin abolēre; probably akin to adolescere to grow up — more at adult
Date:
15th century

1 : to end the observance or effect of : annul <abolish a law> <abolish slavery>
2 : destroy
Click to expand...

hmmm... Anyway...
That very thing about the secret prisons is one of the reasons he wants a change.
Click to expand...

So he does want to 'abolish' them now then! Wait, you're waffling!

Why the hell would anyone think change is a bad thing in this arena?
Click to expand...

Change can be gooder or badder. No?
 
fly said:
Where did I say that? Misdirection?

Misdirection?
Click to expand...
Then why even bring it up? The one and only point to the argument that people bring about abolishing those agencies is because they actually believe he doesn't want to conduct foreign intelligence or have federal law enforcement.

If that's not your problem with the idea then what is?
If they are still so bad, why doesn't he want to 'abolish' them anymore. BTW, lets take a minute to look up the word abolish.
Click to expand...
Because they do have greater oversight today than they did thirty years ago. It's not perfect and still needs a lot of work but it's no longer a top priority. Although there are still plenty of things about both he would change.
hmmm... Anyway...
Click to expand...
And your point? You keep harping on that one word when he never actually said it. Both quotes that Russert pulled out were by other journalists. You have yet to show a single incident where he has actually stated that he would entire abolish either agency. And even if you did it still wouldn't change the fact that he has and had no intention of ending foreign intelligence gathering or federal law enforcement.

So he does want to 'abolish' them now then! Wait, you're waffling!
Click to expand...
what?
Change can be gooder or badder. No?
Click to expand...
Yes but it's not a fucking flip of the coin. You can't just say we shouldn't change because there's a chance it might end up worse when the idea behind the change is damned good to begin with.

wtfwtfwtf
 
Wren said:
The state isn't doing much to help, at least not around here. I don't know if you heard of Prop 13 or the two dozen or so other state laws like it, but it basically caps property taxes, thus cutting deeply into school funding. The basic reason is because a huge number of retarded baby boomers decided they're checking out so they'd rather not play anymore, and didn't want to continue supporting the costs of education. Apparently they didn't realize that education is a keystone to keeping your city a good place and your society running well. Oh well, they'll be almost dead by the time it really hits. Jackasses.
Click to expand...
And that's your state's problems. Why should someone else in another state have to contribute to the education of your state's students? The whole point of our system of government is that smaller governments are better controlled by the people.
Of course the issue of education isn't just as simple as funding. But funding is part of it, and after prop 13 the schools began to tailspin as class sizes rose and schools were unable to keep their facilities current and in good repair. And then in Compton, what little money there was going in was being embezzled by the local school system. The principal of the local HS drove a Jaguar when there wasn't a single computer in the whole school. The city had a $55,000 salaried Vice Superintendent of Towels. The place remains the crime-infested shithole you'd imagine it would be.
Click to expand...
Then the people of that city/county/state should be doing something about it. Why the hell do people think it's a good idea to hand over authority for these things to the federal government? It doesn't run things any better and would do absolutely NOTHING about the corruption in Compton's local system. The only thing it would certainly do is create another avenue for corruption and waste money to feed the bureaucracy.
Meanwhile, down the street in Santa Ana, KidWorks is supported by a federal (pork barrel, yes) grant (and donations) and is actually turning around the educational nature of the area. Their dropout rates, illiteracy rates, crime rates, and poverty rates have all dropped. More of them are going to college, and more of the ones that go to college are coming back. All that KidWorks does is what any goddamn school should do, and they do it in 2 hours after school. They have few kids per staff, an emphasis on real skill learning, a well-maintained facility, and a computer lab. And I've seen over and over how it turns around the lives of kids.

Turning to a more theoretical level -- the simple fact is that nobody cares about local or state politics. The reason why the DoE has taken more control is because it was the only way to have education move and adapt in the modern American landscape. Do you have any idea how low the turnout rate is for city/county elections? Hell even the state elections don't fetch good turnout around here. Hell even the presidential election in America is pathetic! Don't kid yourself that it's going to change, either. The city and state politicians know that they can die in office if they just don't rock the boat. Any real change that happens is going to come from the federal level.
Click to expand...

That last sentence is completely untrue. The least amount of change comes at the federal level. When it does it's usually ineffective and inefficient and by the time people notice the problems it's too entrenched to have anything done about it. Smaller government allows for greater change because the people have greater control. If the people simply don't give enough of a fuck to do something about it then why the hell is it better to hand it over to politicians in DC? Why should those of us that do care enough to make a change be subject to the whims of those put in power by the lazy and apathetic?

My god sometimes it feels like y'all would be happy living under some monolithic, one world government where everyone had to live under the exact same laws regardless of culture or regional differences.

So much disappointment. :(
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back