LumRaiderFan

19 minutes ago, baddog said:

So we are worried about the percentages being terrorists? Wow, what next? My wife and my two best friends are Hispanic, so don’t go there again. They should be a voting block because they are not American and most would never swear allegiance to this country. They simply invade and your people make them more comfortable than good hard working Americans. Give it up man. Your argument stinks and again, you know it, but you will continue this charade of covering the wrongdoers. 
I’m done with this. Of course you will have the last day as usual. 

He makes the dumbest arguments, lol.

Comparing a community where you ca get a home built with no SS number to a development in Hardin county, throwing down the race card if you dare question it.

Like I said, waste of time.

12 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Well, Lumberton is not failing to provide a proper education. Neither are the majority of the schools in our area where I live.

This is a political move with the ruse of being used to keep liberal indoctrination away from our kids. While I agree with keeping our kids from being led down the happy blue path, I don't agree with the way they are trying to do it. Texas Conservatives (of which I am) are simply doing this to garner support from the right. If you think they really give two craps about your kids, my kids, any kids, then you are gullible (which I don't believe you are). You're a smart guy. I agree with the vast majority of things you post.

We are being given a poor solution which will raise taxes in the end and could possibly be harmful to a lot of middle class families on down to the lower class. There can be other ways to do it than school vouchers. From a guy that doesn't like paying any more taxes than I have to, I am definitely against it. I am also against fixing one problem by causing many more problems.

Agree, Lumberton is not failing to provide a good education, and they won't be affected by vouchers.  Gotta look at what is happening in other school districts that will get here eventually.

I never approach anything with the mindset that government cares about me or mine, that's why I don't understand why anyone has a problem with taking away their decision and giving it to the individual, as in vouchers, where I want to spend money on my kid's education.

If you have a better way to keep a poorly run school district in check than simple competition (vouchers), I'd like to hear it.

Please don't say the TEA, more government is never the answer.

4 minutes ago, baddog said:

This is totally wrong and you know it. You’re back to arguing with a billboard sign. 

It's officially a waste of time.

Conservative, lol

2 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

That was poorly done… but why didn’t his predecessor handle it in an orderly manner? Isn’t he all about America first, nationalism, isolationism, etc? Maybe because there wasn’t a “good” way to get our boys out of there?  

We're not talking about Trump, stay focused, for once.

6 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Reading comprehension… I’m betting that some R congressman got that Dad a seat so that the Dad could make a spectacle. 
 

You do realize that every President, ever, has “blood on their hands,” right? 

Yes, I do, however, some is avoidable, like the Afghanistan withdrawal.

7 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

All I knew is that some dude up in the balcony was yelling something incomprehensible. 
 

I wonder who got that guy into the event? Five bucks says that they weren’t a Democrat.  Some Republican used that poor dad’s grief for a photo op. 

Yea, I'm sure he was simply looking for a photo op after losing his son in the 100% avoidable withdrawal from Afghanistan.  Your guy has blood on his hands and you have openly admitted you'll stand by and help him get re-elected.

55 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I tuned in hoping to see an epic train wreck, but it never happened. His delivery was far from perfect, but we never got a “locked up like Mitch McConnell and had to be led away by his handlers” moment, either. 
 

It wasn’t pretty and I don’t think anybody was convinced of his vitality by watching that. 
 

I remember a few years ago when it was scandalous that one of the Justices said “not true” during the speech. Then you had a congressman yell “liar” a year or two ago. I thought that there were some people who really made us all look bad last night. The catcalls, the guy in the gallery that got tossed out, etc… Things are getting worse between the factions in America, and this event just proved it… I’m not excited about where we’re all headed. 

Marjorie Taylor Greene did a good job of representing Trump fans, in my opinion. She looked ridiculous, acted inappropriately, made a fool of herself and put on display for the whole world how buffoon-ish and out-of-touch with reality Trump’s fans are on a daily basis. She served y’all well. 

Sadly, there are folks like yourself that put more importance on the speech last night than what has actually happened over the last three years.

The guy that got tossed out lost his son in the Afghanistan withdrawal, remember that?

1 hour ago, CardinalBacker said:

Because she still can’t. A voucher won’t cover rides to school (wherever that may be), uniforms, the entirety of tuition, they don’t have free lunch programs, etc, etc… 

A voucher won’t help a mom in a rough place get her genius into a a private school that doesn’t exist in that area. But it will help that guy in river oaks with the tuition bill on his three kids that he’s already paying. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why?” Why are they fighting so hard for this program? What’s the motivation? We all agree that anything that strips money from public schools is a bad thing, right? If the schools lose 5% of their students to private schools, they’re going to have their funding cut, right? But their expenses won’t go down. The only way for this to work is if we raise local taxes to subsidize them for the funds that the state is redirecting to the voucher program… that’s what no one wants to explain. 
 

You just have to ask yourself “why are they fighting so hard,” and the answer is this… everybody complains “why should I have to pay school taxes? I don’t even have kids in school!” The fat cats got somebody to listen, and “school choice” became the cause that politicians have to get done. 

Is your tin foil hat shaped like a Stetson?

20 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

I think the real purpose of the legislation is out there. We keep thinking in terms of kids getting better educations, avoiding liberal-leaning teaching, etc… and we’re focusing on middle class kids. 
 

What I think it’s really about is higher income families with kids in private schools… people whose annual tax bill looks nothing like yours or mine. Let’s say that I’m a wealthy family man with three kids in private school AND I pay 8k a year in school taxes on my homestead… it’s appraised at $500k. But I’ve also got a business and a handful of rental properties as well…. What’s more annoying than paying $30k a year for tuition to send my 3 kids to private school (so they don’t have to attend with “those” kids), then having to write another check to cover $30k to cover my school tax bill. 
 

So I call my good friends (I’ve got their cell numbers because I also contribute to campaigns) and we cook up a scheme whereby rich guys like me can get a break on my school tax bill by way a school voucher that I can use for tuition for my entitled brats. 
 

It’s not about quality of education, it’s about a break for rich people (who make generous campaign contributions) to send their kids to private schools and get an offset. 
 

That struggling single mom still won’t be able to send her kids anywhere.

If the powers that be really wanted better educations, they’d force all schools to accept all students. People could send their kids wherever they wanted and bad schools would be forced to get better or close because the kids all went to better schools. 

lol, I don't think it's simply about the big bad rich guys.

Why wouldn't the struggling mom be able to send her kids to a better school is she had a voucher?

43 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

The problem is, it’s not their money. 
 

The cost to educate a kid is around 10k per student.  The typical family MIGHT be paying 2000 in school taxes, but taking 16-20k of tax funds away from public schools. 

True, but if a school district is failing to provide a proper education, the option to take that funding to provide a better opportunity for your kids is not a bad idea.  

11 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

Once again, I understand your point. But it’s a flawed system. It’s probably not going to pass in Texas anyway, but the way they have it set up, it’s bound to fail. 
By the way, my last child graduated from public school almost 3 years ago. Where’s my return on investment now? Should I be exempt from school tax?

That's one that has a lot of discussion behind it but I can't see being exempt from school tax.  Personally, if a school district is losing lots of kids to vouchers, there's a problem that I would expect would get some attention and hopefully get fixed to bring kids back.

The best scenario is a well run Independent school district.

1 minute ago, SmashMouth said:

So legislate what can/can't be taught in schools instead of trying to set-up an overpriced education system that ignores middle and lower class. I don't like what's being taught in some of our public schools either. I'm just not for paying even more than I already should be in school taxes.

No more legislation, it's supposed to be an Independent School District.  If you're not running it right, give folks the option to take their money and leave.  More legislation is definitely not the answer, the less government in education (or anything for that matter) the better.

1 minute ago, SmashMouth said:

The average annual tuition for a private school lands between 10,000 to 12,000. The proposed voucher would give a kid approx. $8,000 dollars toward that tuition. The family still has to come up with the balance.

Let's say you have a kid that goes to a private. Dad's a lawyer, banker, businessman, etc. and pays the full tuition to send his kid to the private school. With the voucher system in place, the Dad will now get $8,000 towards the kid's tuition. A net savings of let's say $2,000 on the low side. No problem, right?

Meanwhile, another family who is not so fortunate who sends their kid to public school has the same opportunity to send their child to private school and pay the $2,000 difference. Awesome, right? Only problem is they can't afford it, so that kid stays in public school that is now getting less funding.

Net sum, the better off family gets a break on sending their kid to a private school for a helluva lot less, and the lesser off family is stuck in the same place they were to begin with. All to pay a privatized for profit institution and have the quality of the public school fall even further behind.

You seem to want the government to pick winners and losers, I don't.  Doesn't matter if someone is a lawyer, it's their money, vouchers would allow them to spend it as they please.

I feel the same way about social security and medicare, I've always had a problem with government taking my money with no option to spend it where I see fit, same goes for education.

Texas is the last stand at the moment, but there will come a day when the garbage that is taught in public schools will make lots of folks rethink the idea of vouchers.

We'll probably have to agree to disagree and that's ok.

22 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

For people who really hate income redistribution, it’s remarkable that the Rs want to tax the public, then hand that money to other people to spend as they see fit. 

Only Rs want to tax the public,  gotcha.

lol lol

5 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

You don't have to move. Go to another district of your liking. Folks do it all the time.

I would rather take MY money and put it in my school of choice that's better for my kid.  We're coming at this from two different directions, your concern seems to be protect an ISD while mine is not.  I also think that school taxes should have an expectation of a decent return on investment and if not, customers can take their business, and their money, elsewhere.

10 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

We will have to respectfully disagree. Because at the end of the day, I think the school vouchers will do more harm than good. If you really want to go point by point, I can do that. But it's a lot. I'm not saying school vouchers don't have some merit. Just not enough in my opinion.

We will have to respectfully disagree, I can't see taking any option off the table that could place a kid in a better learning environment when the option to move is not possible.

12 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

You're right. And it's unfortunate. If moving isn't an option, then go to another district possibly that has an open campus? There are plenty of open school districts. There's not usually a school bus to service private schools at this point, so the child already has to get picked up / dropped off.

Regardless, there are plenty of reasons against it. A voucher program that allows any Texas student to use public money (I like to think of it as "my money") to offset the cost of private-school tuition would divert dollars from public schools, tightening already tight public school budgets, without a proportionate reduction in public school costs - possibly to the point of raising taxes to keep them afloat. I also think it will incentivize the private schools to raise price of tuition (to put in their own back pockets) because they are getting subsidized by, that's right, my money.

 

I realize there are issues, both ways, but it is also "their" money if they are a taxpayer.  I think the only thing that would improve a poorly managed school district is competition.

I think it's an option to consider if someone needs one, at the end of the day, it's about the kids, not an ISD.

3 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

lol.  not at all, I can just look at things from outside of the Trump worship zone.  Never tagged you for a Trump apologist, but here it's showing.  Me having an opinion about Trump means I don't care about the border?  You're better than that.  Flynn tried to put Trump in jail, so it's okay that Trump has gone after every Republican who didn't back him after January 6th?  That's laughable.  And you'll never convince me Trump is about anything more than himself.  He'll do what's best for America as long as it suits his needs.  He's on par with the clowns in office right now in that regard, but his stances currently align much more than mine, so I'll vote for him, as I said.

Characteristics of a dictator: suspension or interference of elections and civil liberties; repression of political opponents; not abiding by the procedures of the rule of law; and the existence of a cult of personality centered on the leader.

check, check, check, check.  

Not a Trump apologist and certainly not in the worship zone, he simply doesn't live in my head like others.  Already said I don't care for him, but not to the point of hurting the country by not voting for him.

My point on the border is that you seemed more concerned about the fake insurrection than the dumpster fire we have right now, one is made up and one is happening, I feel you're better than that.

Can you make me a list of folks that he has ruined their career or put in jail?  Don't give me folks that are in jail put there by others simply because they were Trump associates.

Would never convince you he's not about himself, he's a narcissist, no doubt.  So was Clinton, Obama, on and on, folks need to get over it, although I doubt they will.

Oh well, tired of beating this very dead horse, it's Trump VS Biden, we'll see.

23 minutes ago, SmashMouth said:

I am a pretty conservative guy, but I am against school vouchers. Who pays for the public schools (several of which were just built in my town of Lumberton)?

I have yet to hear a comprehensive argument that pushes me to the school voucher system, and I've read quite a few.

And I really have issues with taxpayer money being given to private "for profit" schools.

What do you tell someone that lives a poorly managed school district and moving wasn't an option?  

17 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

He started a lot of crap, and pushed a lot of lies that led to a lot of outrage, that without a doubt led to the insurrection or whatever you want to call it.  I'm not saying he told people to do it, but he fueled the flames.  The way that he tries to ruin the careers of anyone who doesn't support his rhetoric is particularly alarming.  He has all of the common characteristics of a dictator, and I truly believe he would enjoy being one.  Even worse he has a large enough cult-like following that he might could just about pull it off.  There's plenty to be concerned about, beyond him just being a jerk.  That said, I'm still voting for him and hoping for the best.  But I wouldn't at all be surprised if his next presidency (if he wins) is a lot different from his first.  Trump is about power, not America.  Being a good president almost kept him in office longer.  He wont be able to run again after this one, so he very well may just do whatever the heck he wants, like he always has gotten away with.  

Good grief, just another one of your ridiculous overdramatic posts that is nonsense.

I'm sure you'll get a like from CB and Big girl on this one.

The insurrection is complete garbage, funny that this concerns you more than the flame fanning going on at the border by this administration, welcoming folks.

Ruining careers is the democrats specialty, remember Flynn?  Doesn't seem to concern you that they have tried to put Trump in jail and fine him millions on completely bogus charges, but I guess it's ok if you don't like the guy.

The dictator crap isn't even worth addressing.

Trump is much more about America than the clowns in there now and there is no disputing that.

Never tagged you for a TDS guy, but it's sadly showing.

25 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

I agree with this entire paragraph.  It still doesn't change the fact that there are people who would rather more of the same than more of trump.  It's fine to blame them, but if you know they're going to vote against him and put him there anyway don't whine if he loses the election.  

This is the literal definition of Donald Trump, and there's a fairly reasonable fear from some about what he'll try to do if he gets his power back.  I think that's something that a lot of righties like to brush over or ignore, whereas the moderates will settle for Biden over risking what they perceive (based on the things coming directly from his own mouth) Trump will do if elected. 

  This last one i disagree with wholly.  Any republican that isn't one of the main Trump disciples would win easily against Biden, Harris, or Newsome this election.

The reality is it will be Trump and Biden, what folks do after that is 100% on them, don't place blame on others.

17 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

every person who's firmly on either side is going to vote for a cake-walk candidate.  If you thought trump wasn't going to do a very good job you'd still vote for him because he's a republican.  Almost all Rs would.  I can't stand Trump, but I'M DOING IT.   It's a funny double standard that the right really gets hung up on.  

No double standard, both sides are guilty of what you are saying.

Lots of folks, including myself, are willing to vote for Trump because he was a good President, like him or not.

You seem to think rude and crude alone makes a President a turd, it does not.

Now biden, there's a real turd President for you.

21 minutes ago, Separation Scientist said:

The stupid Dems I work with want to vote for green new deal Democrats. but they work with me in the Energy industry. Go figure. And they blame Abbott, of all people for the flood of illeagles in to Houston. This is beyond stupid to the point of full on brainwashing. 

These are the folks that we're told will vote for the "cake-walk" candidate, if presented.

It's a voter problem, not a candidate problem.

16 minutes ago, bullets13 said:

Same story, different day.  The right blaming those "stupid voters" for not voting for the far-right conspiracy theorist TV reporter.  The responsibility is on the party to put out decent candidates.  Just like mush mouth won in Pennsylvania because he was running against Dr. Oz, of all people.  Trump endorses people who will parrot everything he says, and there are enough worshippers of him to get them the nom, but not enough people willing to push just anyone through and get them elected.  The right would put out a dog turd as a candidate in an election and then blame the voters for not electing them.

But somehow you find no fault in the left putting up an ever worse turd, and then electing them.