Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

So you moved to a red state so your kids could go to college for free or cheap?

No, I had a lot of reasons. In my case, college was actually cheaper than grade school bc the public school in my blue state was underperforming, so I needed to pay 35k per kid for grade school. Free college is a nice bonus. My point is, it is not as simple as "blue states have better education." It is very circumstantial. For many people, a move to a red state can provide better public education opportunities.

And to clarify, that is 35k per year. That's more than national averages for college. And that's as cheap as I could find for roughly the same level of education that my kids now have at public school in the red state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

So you moved to a red state so your kids could go to college for free or cheap?

No, I had a lot of reasons. In my case, college was actually cheaper than grade school bc the public school in my blue state was underperforming, so I needed to pay 35k per kid for grade school. Free college is a nice bonus. My point is, it is not as simple as "blue states have better education." It is very circumstantial. For many people, a move to a red state can provide better public education opportunities.

And to clarify, that is 35k per year. That's more than national averages for college. And that's as cheap as I could find for roughly the same level of education that my kids now have at public school in the red state.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like Bill Clinton to come back and do his circa 1990s presidential agenda again. That would be ideal.

Kicking poor people off assistance programs? Sealing the border and restricting immigration? Letting oil companies drill wherever they please? Renewing the operating licenses of nuclear power plants? Runaway defense spending and sweetheart programs for defense contractors?


Yeah, no thanks.


Bill Clinton was actually the most successful republican president ever elected. He just fooled a bunch of dopes like the people here into thinking he was a Dem.

Anonymous wrote:I would like Bill Clinton to come back and do his circa 1990s presidential agenda again. That would be ideal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

So you moved to a red state so your kids could go to college for free or cheap?

No, I had a lot of reasons. In my case, college was actually cheaper than grade school bc the public school in my blue state was underperforming, so I needed to pay 35k per kid for grade school. Free college is a nice bonus. My point is, it is not as simple as "blue states have better education." It is very circumstantial. For many people, a move to a red state can provide better public education opportunities.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

So you moved to a red state so your kids could go to college for free or cheap?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One would be that the nuclear family is the fundamental unit of society. another is that the state is not responsible for raising children would be another.

Things that the Democrats have spent the last several decades working to destroy.

Define nuclear family, because at this point, the June/Ward Cleaver with 2.2 kids and a picket fence is very far from the norm.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

So you moved to a red state so your kids could go to college for free or cheap?

Anonymous wrote:One would be that the nuclear family is the fundamental unit of society. another is that the state is not responsible for raising children would be another.

Things that the Democrats have spent the last several decades working to destroy.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

I'm an adult with kids. I can see how the phrasing confused you. I saw this as a benefit to me, since the Maryland schools were so poor that I was putting my kids into a $35k/year school (which was a bargain compared to most).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

It's not free. Someone has to pay for it.

Yup, and for red states it usually means the US Department of Education.

For red states, it means using lottery revenues to pay for merit scholarships the state’s public universities. Think Georgia HOPE, Florida Bright Futures and the ones Alabama & Louisiana have. Those states also take a merit-based rather than need-based approach to disbursing such scholarships (versus NY State’s scholarship program, which is income-based). Most Georgia HOPE recipients are UMC kids from the Atlanta suburbs.

Liberals generally regard selling lottery tickets as taxing the poor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How about we bring back a real education for our kids- challenge everyone at their level instead of teaching to lowest common denominator.

Also stop getting offended at every little thing-get over yourself. I'm not even talking about the obvious ones but something minor where that one person makes a complaint and the entire event is scrapped. That would be a great place to start.

I vote left, but agree with this. In the interest of our society, kids need to be educated. But show me a red state that has good education.

As with many things, it's complicated. Red states are far more likely to offer free college to middle- to high-performers. So if you do what I did-- move from a blue state to an affluent area of a red state-- you can get a better public grade school education and also free college.

so "you" moved to a red state when you were in primary school?

Where were your parents, or did "they" move and you went with them?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One would be that the nuclear family is the fundamental unit of society. another is that the state is not responsible for raising children would be another.

Things that the Democrats have spent the last several decades working to destroy.

So you oppose same-sex marriage, got it.