StrangeSox

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jun 8, 2011 -> 03:52 PM) yeah IMO it's one of the biggest problems facing this country. I agree that children of parents who divorce can be just as dysfunctional. It's more about a fatherless home than anything. Only data I can find is this from 2009, "41% of children born in the USA were born to unmarried mothers (up from 5% a half-century ago). That includes 73% of non-Hispanic black children, 53% of Hispanic children and 29% of non-Hispanic white children." So take that 41% and add in the children of divorce and it's probably more than half of US homes without fathers. Here's some statistics on children from fatherless homes...some are old, but I doubt things are improving. http://fatherhood.about.com/od/fathersrigh...ss_children.htm So for me it all comes back to that....I figure this is understood, but I'll add it here anyway....I'm not saying some children don't overcome...just odds are stacked against them. A big thing is even if the father isn't in the home...he needs to be very active in their life. But I think a lot of our problems can be traced back to family upbringing. Symptom or ailment? Or both? Strong family and community support is definitely very important, but I don't think the family crumbled first, then the rest came.

QUOTE (bmags @ Jun 8, 2011 -> 01:01 PM) I'm not sure, as to tex's part. Throwing them out certainly would probably improve the rest in the classroom, but it also creates a huge barrier for that student. To be fair this is actually how a lot of other countries run their secondary schools. Kids get tracked early on into college or vocational.

QUOTE (iamshack @ Jun 8, 2011 -> 08:02 AM) Or maybe it has something to do with the fact that the last few generations of American children (mine included), have had a soft, easy lifestyle for the most part due to a higher standard of living than the rest of the world and has failed to develop a work ethic. Pretty sure the SOL in many countries that beat US in education is on par or better than the US average.

This statement is non-controversial. It's one of the basic tenants of Christianity.

QUOTE (Jenksismyb**** @ Jun 8, 2011 -> 11:51 AM) Agreed. Fine, let the states do it individually. Oh, wait, you'll cry over that too.

QUOTE (Controlled Chaos @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 12:53 PM) BTW Canuck fans are already crying conspiracy Is there any group of fans in any sport that whine more than Canucks fans?

No 8???? Lebron still the GOAT!!!

QUOTE (Brian @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 11:59 PM) If that is the case, then you missed some sweet plays by Wade tonight. Nah, we all saw him miss the FT and drop the pass! Seriously though, he had some fantastic plays.

That double-dip, where Sallie Mae gets the money from the government when you default and then tacks on huge commissions to collect the debt for the government through a branch of their company, is pretty awesome.

WADE GONNA CHOKE

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 10:40 PM) DIRK GONNA DIRK. DIRK DUNN DIRKED

Huge miss and rebound there. Dallas better actually make a shot here.

The flopping, lol.

Miami Meltdown Part 2?

Infographic time! Sure glad we have those stringent new regulations!

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 09:14 PM) The fact that I read that link hours ago and wound up repeating it here? The way you phrased it made it seem like you came up with on your own. I've seen it in several different stories on Pawlenty now.

Some great commentary from the National Review re: Weiner Hannity was on in the background at the restaurant, he spent what seemed like at least half his show on this. also in before "democrats do it too," because the media does obsess over this trivial bulls*** regardless of party. edit: not so sure about the not-so-subtle racism in the middle paragraph

Just saw an ad, Free Xbox 360 with a Windows 7 PC purchase.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 08:20 PM) I bet if I google "private army" i'll find that private companies do similar things. Tim Pawlenty opposes having a military! You know how I know you didn't read the link?

Tim Pawlenty's Plan to Destroy The World It seems like it's just another version of the Fair (lol) Tax with some extra-dumb populism thrown in.

QUOTE (Quinarvy @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 08:10 PM) Thirty six f***ing years?! With questions that they did it? God damn. Corrupt, racist prison and legal system? No way!

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Jun 7, 2011 -> 07:59 PM) Which is why I am still waiting for someone to justify how these two were going to save the world somehow. Trust me, I am not holding my breath. But your point is irrelevant. Even if I grant you that their appointment is ultimately inconsequential, it doesn't legitimize refusing to allow a vote on their appointment. It's a red herring. It's an attempt to deflect away from a discussion of the larger Republican tactic of refusing to allow confirmation votes on dozens or hundreds of appointments. bmags already addressed your point, by the way, by accurately pointing out the hyperbole. No one claimed they would "save the world," but said that "hey, maybe its a bad idea to hold up fed board nominations for no reason, not good, not bad, but literally no reason during an economic crisis." You responded with a pretty lame and pretty unreasonable standard of "well show me a specific vote they would have changed!!!" Which, again, is irrelevant to the actual issue: preventing Executive branch appointments from even being discussed or voted on as a matter of policy and nothing more.

Amnesty International describes their treatment: From a 2008 NPR story: Also I'm pretty sure their prison model is based on Cool Hand Luke:

Bernanke cautions against short-term deficit reduction obsession:

The Boston Tea Party and ensuing rebellion was about high taxes on business and getting rid of Big Government. Also to keep Big Government's hands off my guns/medicare.