New Hope for the Culture of America

[beardman2]

Originally Posted by Blackwater

Notice the lack of a reply? Telling, very telling.
Quota based systems in schools or anywhere else is racism. Doesn't matter who it happens to or the color of their skin.

We need to live by these words, not just preach them for set-asides for a particular group.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."


??

for the record I left the room to have dinner between clicking reply and actually typing it. so while slow I'm not blind. Plus you said it better

[Son of Norway]

It's good to see Republicans finally trying to correct one of their misguided forced policies on the citizens. Of course, it does make one wonder where they really stand if they keep changing their minds.

[bd]

Originally Posted by sjp2452

what the...???

Spoken like a true conservative, bd!

My point was that even so-called "conservatives" who always claim "liberals" expect the government to take care of their needs have to call on the government at times.

Kinda one of those pot calling the kettle black deals....

I lived through the de-segregation times here in the South. I was in schools that were involved in race riots. It's a very nasty thing.

No good can come of forced integration. Besides that there are kids of all races who have to ride buses for hours just so the schools systems can meet their quotas.

That's bad for any kid.

bd

[jdavionic]

Originally Posted by bd

My point was that even so-called "conservatives" who always claim "liberals" expect the government to take care of their needs have to call on the government at times.

Kinda one of those pot calling the kettle black deals....

I lived through the de-segregation times here in the South. I was in schools that were involved in race riots. It's a very nasty thing.

No good can come of forced integration. Besides that there are kids of all races who have to ride buses for hours just so the schools systems can meet their quotas.

That's bad for any kid.

bd

Shocking, but true...I agree. I also grew up in the South and experienced the same. I never saw anything good that came from it.

[bd]

Originally Posted by Lubbock

Glad to see that you are becoming conservative, bd.

I'm more conservative than George Bush and anyone who supports him...

...always have been.

...always will be.



bd

[NewXD40fun]

Originally Posted by bd

I'm more conservative than George Bush and anyone who supports him...

...always have been.

...always will be.



bd

Yeah, sure. And voting for Democrat John F. Kerry for President in 2004 was your way of proving that you are "conservative".

A botched joke maybe?






Tom

[Brickboy240]

Hacker,

The reason we in Texas call it "the War of Norhtern Aggression" is because in the true definition of a "civil war" it says this is a conflict between two factions that want control of one country's govt.

What happened in America in the 1860s was a group of states wanting to be FREE of the American govt. - not take it over.

Also, this gets overshadowed by the slavery issue (why, I do not know...only 4% of southerners actually owned slaves), but many reasons the Southern states wished to secede were very similar to the reasons the Colonists fought the British: trade issues, taxation, states rights, oppression and restrictions. Self-styled historians will make everyone think that slavery was the main reason for the war...this is simply not true.

General Robert E. Lee never owned slaves and was against the practice. General Grant owned slaves right up to the time Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclimation. Somehow, this little nugget ALSO gets left out of history classes these days.

Big difference, if you ask me.

It was NOT a "Civil War"

- Brickboy240

PS: I have ancestors on my father's side that immigrated to TX from Ireland in the late 1850s to help the Texans fight the Indians, Mexicans and the Yankees. A tough, unruly bunch, no doubt!

[beardman2]

Originally Posted by Brickboy240

Hacker,

The reason we in Texas call it "the War of Norhtern Aggression" is because in the true definition of a "civil war" it says this is a conflict between two factions that want control of one country's govt.

What happened in America in the 1860s was a group of states wanting to be FREE of the American govt. - not take it over.

Also, this gets overshadowed by the slavery issue (why, I do not know...only 4% of southerners actually owned slaves), but many reasons the Southern states wished to secede were very similar to the reasons the Colonists fought the British: trade issues, taxation, states rights, oppression and restrictions. Self-styled historians will make everyone think that slavery was the main reason for the war...this is simply not true.

General Robert E. Lee never owned slaves and was against the practice. General Grant owned slaves right up to the time Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclimation. Somehow, this little nugget ALSO gets left out of history classes these days.

Big difference, if you ask me.

It was NOT a "Civil War"

- Brickboy240

PS: I have ancestors on my father's side that immigrated to TX from Ireland in the late 1850s to help the Texans fight the Indians, Mexicans and the Yankees. A tough, unruly bunch, no doubt!

I think it was one of the first people on my fathers side to come to the country fought with the north. I know very little other than that. His son or grandson was the local sheriff and moonshiner

From what I've read about it I'd agree it was a war of northern aggression.

[LUVMYSIGP225]

I have been biting my tongue since Mr. North Olmsted posted this thread, but I gotta interject, here. Only urban dwellers have to worry about this problem, as far as I am concerned. When you have a large, diverse population within one school district, then the problems arise. How do you explain a nice high school in the rich section of a city that also has a ghetto with a school that looks like a shanty town? A little explaining has to happen. The only way to avoid it is to move to a community where the problem can not happen. Usually, you gotta spend the bucks.

Personally, I will never be mistaken for a philanthropist. I am from the old school frame of mind that you get what you work for. Well, I want maximum bang for my buck, and if I earn more tax, I want a better school than he who pays less tax. Sorry. I give no handouts.


When I selected what town to buy my house in, I used this:

http://www.schoolmatters.com/

Complete with demographics of the school. I found my kids a school based on several factors. Glad I used it. The school got the highest state academic rating that Ohio can award to a school. One of the lowest incidences of violence and bullying. I couldn't be happier.

[bd]

Originally Posted by NewXD40fun

Yeah, sure. And voting for Democrat John F. Kerry for President in 2004 was your way of proving that you are "conservative".

A botched joke maybe?






Tom

You don't even know what a conservative is. You think that just because you vote Republican that you are yourself a conservative and that you are voting for conservatives.

The 3 main standards for a conservative are:

1)smaller federal government and less intervention in private citizens' lives

2)fiscal responsibility

and

3)strict adherence to the Constitution.

Bush fails to meet these standards

Anyone such as you who who supports George Bush is not conservative nor are they supporting a conservative.

You think you are a conservative because you are registered Republican instead of being a Republican because you are conservative.

The voters showed what they thought of fake conservatives and if the Republicans try to run another drugstore cowboy in '08 it will happen again.

In the criteria listed above I am much more conservative than Bush and you.

A lot.


bd