Dept of Education Civil Rights Division wants secret trials for sexual stereotyping

[AAAintheBeltway]

This episode is illustrative for several reasons.

For one, it should make independents who voted for obama very ashamed of their naivete. You're not just voting for the "Best" candidate. You're voting to put thousands of peopl ein highly influential jobs throughout the bureaucaracy, jobs where they will be making policies that affect you. If you vote for a leftwing democrat like obama, don't be surprised that even more far-out radical get appointed to those jobs. They don't have to be elected, so the real nutjobs can be appointed. So we get the NLRB, run by a far left union lawyer, trying to tell Boeing where it can build plants. And we get extreme feminist nonsense like this Department of Education star chamber procedures for guys accused in secret of sexaul assault.

Another lesson is the only sure way to deal with this kind of threat is to do away with the department entirely. Is there any real reason we have a Department of Education, other than as a payoff to the NEA?

We have a budget crisis. Here is a very appealing target. A huge useless bureaucracy full of liberal zealots.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from Artful D0dger:

Actually, going back to "Clinton level taxes" would make a marginal impact on the budget. It would barely make a dent. It would cost more jobs and end up hurting the budget really.

Government agencies are actually one of the biggest parasites. Many of them shouldn't even exist. The department of education for example which has a 71 billion dollar budget, on top of another 100 billion they got from the "stimulus" package.

This nation was doing just fine without a centralized dept of education. In fact our scores started to tank a couple years after it was established. Before the dept of education, we consistently were one of the top nations in terms of education.

The best thing we could possibly do would be to start kicking out the illegals and secure the border. 30 million NEW JOBS for TAX PAYING Americans. Mostly unskilled or lowskilled jobs. That means they are jobs for the poorest Americans. Less workers means that employers would have to raise wages to attract labor. Kicking out the 30 million illegals would be the best thing we could possibly do for poor and jobless Americans, yet for some reason, these bleeding heart ankle grabbers aren't interested in that.

I implied cutting spending as well by saying cut all government agencies funding back to 2000 levels and I would put an end to TSA,Homeland security etc.Spending would also be cut with no wars unless attacked and Iraq and Afghanistan coming to an end.I would like any other wars paid for as they go by raising taxes to pay for them,no more USA credit card .That was included in my balanced budget part of my post

I wouldn't end the education dept,I would reform it though.No loans or grants for these for profit schools with 30,000 tuition for 9.00 an hour jobs,no loans or grants for majors like women's history and other bull shit degrees etc

The immigration situation isn't solely on the back of democrats.Reagan passed amnesty,Bush and the 2008 GOP nominee both tried to

 

[Artful D0dger]

See, this is why a Paul-Nader (anti establishment) ticket COULD work. There's alot of things both sides disagree on, but there's also alot on which they agree.

I really don't see any reason to keep the dept of education around however, it's pushed tuition costs through the roof, caused scores to tank and made everyone suck equally, through legislation like "no child left behind". Just think if we had 170 billion back on the books, and that's just if it was gone for the last year! Has the dept of education created 170 billion of value for America in the last year? Comon.

I never put immigration solely on the back of dems, I just know what needs to be done and the only people I hear making any noise about it are on the right. The only democrats who want to do something about immigration are the KKK as far as I can tell.

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

I implied cutting spending as well by saying cut all government agencies funding back to 2000 levels and I would put an end to TSA,Homeland security etc.Spending would also be cut with no wars unless attacked and Iraq and Afghanistan coming to an end.I would like any other wars paid for as they go by raising taxes to pay for them,no more USA credit card .That was included in my balanced budget part of my post

I wouldn't end the education dept,I would reform it though.No loans or grants for these for profit schools with 30,000 tuition for 9.00 an hour jobs,no loans or grants for majors like women's history and other bull shit degrees etc

The immigration situation isn't solely on the back of democrats.Reagan passed amnesty,Bush and the 2008 GOP nominee both tried to

 

[Larson]

Quote from Artful D0dger:

See, this is why a Paul-Nader (anti establishment) ticket COULD work. There's alot of things both sides disagree on, but there's also alot on which they agree.

I really don't see any reason to keep the dept of education around however, it's pushed tuition costs through the roof, caused scores to tank and made everyone suck equally, through legislation like "no child left behind". Just think if we had 170 billion back on the books, and that's just if it was gone for the last year! Has the dept of education created 170 billion of value for America in the last year? Comon.

I never put immigration solely on the back of dems, I just know what needs to be done and the only people I hear making any noise about it are on the right. The only democrats who want to do something about immigration are the KKK as far as I can tell.

It sounds crazy, but when you examine it, not a bad idea. Nader would satisfy some of the lefties, but he bows to no one. I like that about him. Ron Paul, enough said. There would be too much opposition from entrenched gov't hacks and lifetime state worshippers against this ticket. But I agree, it is going to take a left-right coalition similar to this to fix things, the current assholes won't get the job done, they like things just the way they are.

 

[Artful D0dger]

Well ALL the big money would be against them. But virtually all the grass roots would be for them. They have spoken about it before:

<iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/kwIZ4syCFLc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Who knew Nader was such a racist?

Quote from Larson:

It sounds crazy, but when you examine it, not a bad idea. Nader would satisfy some of the lefties, but he bows to no one. I like that about him. Ron Paul, enough said. There would be too much opposition from entrenched gov't hacks and lifetime state worshippers against this ticket.

 

[Lucrum]

Quote from Artful D0dger:

I really don't see any reason to keep the dept of education around however, it's pushed tuition costs through the roof, caused scores to tank and made everyone suck equally, through legislation like "no child left behind".

Probably because there is no rational reason to keep them, or the dept of energy either for that matter.

 

[Artful D0dger]

Yeah, I'm not old enough to have witnessed it, but I'm sure there are some guys on this board who remember the time before the dept of education. Our education stats were some of the best in the world, now they are some of the poorest in the developed world. My dad tells me about how every state used to have it's own education dept and that's as high as it went. States would compete to have the highest scores on the standardized exams and they would be published along with graduation rates and studen:teacher ratios, and that would be a big draw for people to live there and companies to set up operations there. We seem to have taken the laissez faire out of education, which has made our education go down the toilet.

Quote from Lucrum:

Probably because there is no rational reason to keep them, or the dept of energy either for that matter.

 

[AK Forty Seven]

Quote from Artful D0dger:

See, this is why a Paul-Nader (anti establishment) ticket COULD work. There's alot of things both sides disagree on, but there's also alot on which they agree.

I really don't see any reason to keep the dept of education around however, it's pushed tuition costs through the roof, caused scores to tank and made everyone suck equally, through legislation like "no child left behind". Just think if we had 170 billion back on the books, and that's just if it was gone for the last year! Has the dept of education created 170 billion of value for America in the last year? Comon.

I never put immigration solely on the back of dems, I just know what needs to be done and the only people I hear making any noise about it are on the right. The only democrats who want to do something about immigration are the KKK as far as I can tell.

To start an end to the establishment bull shit on both sides I'd vote for a Paul /Nader ticket over Obama and the GOP candidate,I really would.

I don't think Paul/Nader would be perfect though because all the establishment hacks in congress would try to stop everything they tried to do,I

 

[Artful D0dger]

Yes, but congress took a notably anti-establishment direction this last election, if you'll recall. There's no reason that trend couldn't continue. Of course there would be speed bumps but a Paul-Nader administration could well end up doing something CRAZY, like lobbying reform and vote auditing which would be game changers.

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

To start an end to the establishment bull shit on both sides I'd vote for a Paul /Nader ticket over Obama and the GOP candidate,I really would.

I don't think Paul/Nader would be perfect though because all the establishment hacks in congress would try to stop everything they tried to do,I

 

[Larson]

Quote from AK Forty Seven:

To start an end to the establishment bull shit on both sides I'd vote for a Paul /Nader ticket over Obama and the GOP candidate,I really would.

I don't think Paul/Nader would be perfect though because all the establishment hacks in congress would try to stop everything they tried to do,I

so would I.