Mike Luckovich for January 27, 2014

Yep, nobody’s listening to you any more Obama…!

The only people less moral, and more despicable than most 1%érs are the ones who are there loyal lackeys.

Care for the downtrodden? Whose doing the downtroddening?

An interesting reference.

You should try it. You might actually get an education.

Man, you really did drink gallons of Kool-Aid! Bain Capital made way more money closing companies down and selling off their assets. And if Obama had an “easy” time of it getting elected, it was because the horrors of the Bush years would have elevated anyone to savior status. But of course, you manage to overlook a Republican party which has sabotaged all efforts to revive the economy because they want to keep people like yourself down, but believing. Harley and Enoki, you both need therapy.

No ailurophile, I want a return to a weak central government. History shows that a powerful central government that can tax and regulate without check will inevidably lead to a decline in the welfare of the majority of the people it pretends to serve..Socialism and socialist-like governments love poverty because it breeds dependence. The 1% love it because it ensures they remain where they are.So, if you really want a President that cares for the downtrodden the last person you want in office is a vacuous Progressive Leftist like Obama; not that the Republicans are much better… But, Obama or someone like him is the worst choice for President there is.

“Obama? Does he ever stop running for the job he all ready has?”~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Do I detect a tiny bit of bias here?

Not only is he a member of the 1%, but also has been their greatest ally while convincing a good chunk of the other 99% that he is working in their best interest. Greatest salesman in history.

Enoki: Yemen is right up your alley, or maybe Somalia, no resources or no government, take your pick.

Northern Redman: Atlanta was the first southern city to integrate its government, mainly because it didn’t have a black ghetto but they were all over town. Dallas had the same situation, but to a far lesser degree as it did have a ghetto and the servant quarters in back could (and were) easily torn down. But get into the more rural areas and about the only thing that has changed is blacks in the schools (only) to provide a winning football team, but still segregated in the educational parts.

The view of the 10th Amendment you state, is as incomplete as that of the Nazi Revolutionary Army on the Second. It leaves out both of the vital “or to the people” and the “enumerations” in the Preamble, just as the NRA ignores the first half of the second which provides for the common defense without the tyrannical institutions of standing armies, mercenaries, or conscription. No militia country ever started a war, but could sure stop one at its border – look at Switzerland. The Abwehr estimated it would take 60 divisions of casualties to invade and all they would get would be sabotaged precision factories and hydroelectric power plants and guerrilla operations thereafter, so they didn’t try.

You obviously don’t understand what the 1% really represents. He doesn’t come close to being in the 1%.

Oh, brother! How ignorant can this cartoon be?

Quote from the first pp of your link: “Only a few weeks into this midterm election year, the right-wing political zeppelin is fully inflated with secret cash and is firing malicious falsehoods at supporters of health care reform.”.Whatever “accuracy” your link may have had it shot straight to hell with “right-wing political zeppelin”, which only shows how passionately the New York Times slams down the lefty koolaid during their daily “Obama is my Jesus” worship sessions..Wasn’t worth reading past that.

Northern Redman: I got to see them up close and personal in Dallas, back just before and after Kennedy’s murder while they were helping engineer the purge of the Boy Scouts. Their largely successful work in that regard (conflation of militarism and patriotism) closely paralleled that of the HitlerJungend in Germany and Young Pioneers in the USSR.

You say that the curriculum is mandated by the Dept. of Education; can you be more specific? How much detail comes down from the Federal level? Do they say, “You have to teach ancient history at some point” or do they say, “You have to teach ancient history in grade nine” or do they say, “You have to use this textbook when you teach ancient history”? And so on.+I have some experience of the people who have graduate degrees in education; some are very good, and some I wouldn’t trust to write a grocery list.

So I looked up the Common Core and what I found suggests that this is not a federal program. Here are a couple of passages from their website:

“What is the Common Core State Standards Initiative? The Common Core State Standards Initiative is a state-led effort that established a single set of clear educational standards for kindergarten through 12th grade in English language arts and mathematics that states voluntarily adopt. The standards are designed to ensure that students graduating from high school are prepared to enter credit bearing entry courses in two or four year college programs or enter the workforce. The standards are clear and concise to ensure that parents, teachers, and students have a clear understanding of the expectations in reading, writing, speaking and listening, language and mathematics in school.Who leads the Common Core State Standards Initiative? The nation’s governors and education commissioners, through their representative organizations the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) led the development of the Common Core State Standards and continue to lead the initiative. Teachers, parents, school administrators and experts from across the country together with state leaders provided input into the development of the standards.”http://www.corestandards.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions

Well, if you think the feds shouldn’t ever give any money to the states for education, then I can see your point. If it’s reasonable for the feds to give the states money for education, then it seems reasonable that the feds would want to know how the money is being used. Is this No Child Left Behind? I left the US before that came into effect, so I don’t know much about it. I’m perfectly willing to believe it’s terrible, or wonderful, or somewhere in between. (I’m not a fan of lots of standardized testing, which I gather is part of the program.) What I do suspect is that some of the states were not doing a good job of educating their children, and I think it’s perfectly reasonable for the federal government to use grants to encourage states to do a better job. Encouragement is not coercion. If I say to my child, “I’ll pay you $20 if you get a straight A report card” you can’t say I have coerced him.

In any case, I just don’t have the feeling that the states are necessarily better than the feds. Sometimes the state level is better, sometimes the federal level is better. Sometimes it’s all up to the individual. I’m pragmatic. So long as it’s constitutional, whatever works is okay by me, state, federal, individual.

Here’s how I see the problem. Let’s say that some states or counties or cities are not providing proper education for their children. Should the Federal government just stand by and say, “Hey, it’s okay that the children in [fill in the blank] aren’t getting much of an education”, or should the Federal government say, “What can we do within the law to encourage [fill in the blank] to do better at educating their children”? Now we can discuss the particular approach they take; it could be that No Child Left Behind isn’t a good way to deal with the problem; but the principle seems to me legitimate.+In a larger context, I share some of your concerns about excessive power in the central government. Anyone who looks at the history of the 20th century (Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union, Communist China, to say nothing of all the smaller dictatorships around and about) has to recognize that central governments can get out of control. And I don’t like the domestic spying that the Obama administration continues, for instance. (In my younger days I was spied on the government; they tapped my phone, they read my mail, and they followed me around, so I know of what I speak.) But I don’t think that state and local governments are any safer, as I have explained, and for that matter I don’t think that the power of corporations or churches is any better than the power of governments. I’m pragmatic, and I believe in countervailing powers.