FTA: Gabbard's past comments supportive of Russia â as well as secret meetings with Syria's president, a close ally of Russia and Iran â are attracting fresh scrutiny from Democrats and national security analysts who fear that as Trump's director of national intelligence she could give Russia a major win, undercut Ukraine, weaken U.S. national security and endanger intelligence ties with allies.
âGabbard, like Gaetz, is like a hand grenade ready to explode,â former Trump national security adviser John Bolton said
You made it quite clear in the bullying and harassment thread you started that turned this place upside down, that I and several others are not to respond to any posts that you make directed at no one in particular.
Clearly you do not wish to practice what you so loudly preach.
Should I contact management about your breach of good faith ?
Complete hyperbole. I asked not to be stalked and harassed. No one on this forum should be. Replying should always be free to do here. YOU have taken what applied to two others who were banned for obvious ugliness as a blanket decree. I enjoy engaging with the members here and sharing mutual respect â not seeking conflict. Do not twist my intent through your personal filter as doctrine to hammer on these walls.
My goodness Kurtster, you take the smallest thing and make it into far more than it is. It was a simple phrase and funny to some.
Why are you so eager to fight with someone? Did I attack you personally? Use foul language? Try to change your mind?
I use this playful phrase whenever anyone points to something irrelevant or a distraction. You take it as though I'm trying to start something. Clearly your perception is one of constant victimhood.
My gawd man, I have nothing against you. Lose the chip and tell us who hurt you.
In view of your delicate condition regarding the subtleties between reply and harassment, I won't respond directly to any of your posts. So stop the word salad of your defense before you even begin.
You made it quite clear in the bullying and harassment thread you started that turned this place upside down, that I and several others are not to respond to any posts that you make directed at no one in particular.
Clearly you do not wish to practice what you so loudly preach.
Should I contact management about your breach of good faith ?
FTA - Even before Gabbard left the Democratic Party, ingratiated herself with Donald Trump and secured his nomination to become director of National Intelligence, she was known as a prolific peddler of Russian propaganda.
In almost every foreign conflict in which Russia had a hand, Gabbard backed Moscow and railed against the US. Her past promotion of Kremlin propaganda has provoked significant opposition on both sides of the aisle to her nomination.
Listen: The Republican Charm-Offensive Kevin OâLeary on Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy at @DOGE: âI donât see any reason why these two canât just release the hounds and go nutsâ¦This is fantastic⦠we havenât had anything quite like this and I absolutely love it.â
I think the exponentially rising costs of a college education is a problem that Trump is not trying to solve. Instead, as evidenced by the video, he is using it as an opening to stir up outrage over age-old conservative complaints that academia is dominated by radical liberals bent on indoctrinating our young people.
I'm not sure how Trump or even a responsible, pro-government POTUS could solve the cost of a college education. Part of the problem is that the top-level college get in a reverse price war with each other: applicants and their parents assume that if a college's tuition is sky-high, then the quality of the education must be the same. The best colleges don't have trouble attracting applicants, so at the high end of education universities have not priced their way out of demand.
The other issue is that the universities are often private institutions and don't have to offer insights into their budgets and actual costs. They can game any system of calculating their actual costs by offering student grants and loans.
As for the "age-old conservative complaints that academia is dominated by radical liberals bent on indoctrinating our young people"—yeah, I think that's really outdated. College-level education has become highly vocational. Majors that might have offered the means to move impressionable young minds to the left—philosophy, political science, gender studies—are losing students to majors that provide technical /business skills and good money right after graduation.
So once again, the GOP has come up with a bogeyman that doesn't add up.
black321 has pointed to the likely trend for higher education, however: online access to courses and degree-granting programs. IF you mix online teaching with some in-person sessions and grouping of students into mutual support arrangements, you can make up for the superior power of in-person classes to teach. People lock into a subject when someone is talking to them about that in person. There's greater emotional bonding and memory retention of the material. However, in-person teaching is expensive and rarely available.
Online programs can drop that cost and be effective, provided students get some in-person interaction during the course. Online courses are also a lot easier for people to fit into their lives. It'd be nice to see a greater number of Americans be able to afford higher education and continued technical training.
Since the current batch of Republicans define themselves by their anger, dissatisfaction, and revolt - now they have nowhere to direct that bile. Now, they have to take the reins and improve things, while bearing the inevitable criticism that they'll run into.
The next two years will be a completely different world for those folks that played Armchair Congressman/President. If the price of eggs, gas, rent, mortgages all don't drop - they've no one to blame but themselves.
As I said many years ago: welcome to the end of the Republican Party, which is already in progress. Pull up a chair.
the huge endowments are part of the problem...but so is the race to the top with capital spending, project after project, more and more new buildings, while more education (at least many of the basic, core subjects), should be moving online without the need for the capital spending. Some of the spending is good, eg new science facilites, but also new gyms, rock walls for students, meeting centers...
but once again, trump has the wrong answer to the right type of question.
The money parked in endowments and used as slush funds for pet projects and backdoor bribery is a disgrace to these institutions. Couple that with the rising tuition costs that are crippling those that do get in and leaving others in the dark... Ugh, these are failed institutions.
I think the exponentially rising costs of a college education is a problem that Trump is not trying to solve. Instead, as evidenced by the video, he is using it as an opening to stir up outrage over age-old conservative complaints that academia is dominated by radical liberals bent on indoctrinating our young people.
black321 wrote:
but once again, trump has the wrong answer to the right type of question.
Correct. Take advantage of genuine need for improvement, then fail to improve anything except his bank balance.
Location: Perched on the precipice of the cauldron of truth
Posted:
Nov 12, 2024 - 1:46pm
ScottFromWyoming wrote:
The problem lies somewhere in the middle. But there is a problem. People give a billion dollars tax-free to Stanford, making it a tax-supported institution despite being "private." Then they spend that billion on a think tank or hyper-specialized institute that accepts 10 students when it could be training 10000 doctors.
I think the exponentially rising costs of a college education is a problem that Trump is not trying to solve. Instead, as evidenced by the video, he is using it as an opening to stir up outrage over age-old conservative complaints that academia is dominated by radical liberals bent on indoctrinating our young people.
So stop the word salad of your defense before you even begin.
