Looks like something my senior year government teacher would have done, if he had thought of it. He was an open and unabashed vocal Reagan-hater, and staunch liberal.
This was in 1982, btw.
If, when defending your support for Donald Trump, and your response is,
"But but but... HILLARY!!!", then you lost the argument before you even began.
There's a lot of questions relating to this story...and even it's legitimacy...at this point. Stating absolutes like this just seem foolish to me.
"I am appalled that somebody who is the nominee...would take that kind of position"
"A court took away a presidency"
"...the brother of a man running for president was the governor of the state..."
It's horrifying because Trump is blunt instead of making overt implications.
I think it's karma coming around to bite people. Those teachers are now micromanaged so some admin. saying they didn't know about it his would get his arse in trouble. They recently had a mass exodus of veteran teachers. Churn and burn won't work in education.
We're not talking about what's harmful, we're talking about what belongs on this quiz.Even going by your insanity, doing something, as Democrats have, is far more harmful than talking about it.
Do you think you might pay attention to what we're discussing?
You're not even talking about the right thing. Get back to me when you understand what's going on.You sunk your own boat on that salvo Sly.
This I'll agree with. However, we both know American governmental history is full of laws passed on the very concept of morality. So while the statement isn't really focused on governing, it IS a statement relating to how government should pass laws.The comment about morality isn't seemingly presented in a way focused on governing.
Except the government took the money in taxes, so government run daycares is necessary. In other words, to support government run daycares, the government needs to collect more taxes.AND, if it was focused on governing, there would be no reasonto highlight that we should provide "government-run" daycares as opposed to simply say "provide daycare".
This quiz is very much related to philosophies of governing.
Agree. And I'm not saying the quiz question is a good one, but I AM saying it's valid. And there's a difference between being good and being valid.There is a drastic different between a "cut" to the amount of moeny it spends on helping those who are poor and a flat out statement of not helping.
But at the end of the day, Republicans are routinely saying government is wasting taxpayer money by helping those who are on welfare. This isn't really something which can be denied, I don't believe.
But it does go to show the examples on the quiz were being made to be clear enough to differentiate between the different philosophies. So, much like the communist statement, the first statement is meant to be clear as to who is more likely to believe such a position.I agree. The "Anyone who's not equal must die" portion of the thing is rather ridiculous, but isn't really the focus of the thread
To be clear, I do not think this is a good quiz. I think the person putting it together did not do a good job at all. But the point I'm making is that if you put the statement, "we should not help the poor, it's a waste of money" to 100 Americans, an overwhelming majority of Americans will attribute such a statement to the Republican party. And there's a reason for that.Which again, is an ENTIRELY different suggestion than "we should not help the poor". Stating "We spend too much money helping the poor, and it's a waste" is an entirely different notion than "We should not help the poor, it's a waste".
And if you want to go with that simplistic notion, from that mindset, it'd probably be best as "We waste too much money trying to help the poor survive instead of trying to help them to stop being poor."
If Republicans do not appreciate the idea this is what people think of them, then perhaps they ought to reflect on WHY this is the view of them.
There's no strawman here. I can point to several examples of where the statement on the quiz has been played out in real life in the Republican party.Cool, you go right ahead with not entertaining the strawman of your own creation.
I'm not sure why you think the truth is a strawman.
We agree on this. But you wouldn't even need photoshop for this, I could make this type of quiz in MS Word in 5-10 minutes.In the age of Photoshop I agree 100% here.
Second there are degrees of magnitude difference between "helping" and "pandering" The "instances of Republicans whining" are buffoonery "Obamaphones" were out and out vote buying where he spent the most in areas where he was weakest...funny how the appologists leave that out and lie about the cause of the criticism.
Third, Obamacare is hardly simple "help" It was a lie constructed of "tortured language" to deliberately confuse the GBO and the Supreme court passed without reading and an amdned sub rosa 22 times by a president without even input from the lawmakers. It is NOT simple help to the the poor, but a massive social overhaul and income distribution system that by 2020 will still mean 50 million Americans will have no coverage...more than the entire population of Canada and New Zealand combined.
So lets in future try to be what Obama has not been and that's remotely honest.
And if this isn't worthy of debate why do you post?
"Small people talk about people, average people talk about events, great people talk about ideas" Eleanor Roosevelt
By the way, if it feels like I'm mocking your comment, well...
Sure, there's plenty. Want some examples?Is there anything negative attributed to the GOP that you wouldn't defend had it been on the test. I'm guessing not.
"We think everyone should have a gun so you can shoot anyone who steps on your property"
"We need to tax poor people because we don't want to tax rich corporations"
"We are against abortion because we think women should not have control of their own bodies".
I could go all day long. None of those statements would be valid for this quiz, even if they have long been accusations against the Republican party. Are you done playing partisan games now?