LumRaiderFan

2 minutes ago, Englebert said:

More lies, and accusing me of lies. How long will you embarrass yourself.

Obama weaponized the IRS against Conservatives. He spied on Fox News (and AP) reporters. Are you denying these facts? I'm sure he probably had something to do with Hillary's "Russia, Russia, Russia" dossier. No telling what else was done. Biden has a new attack almost daily. You even admitted it. So try to disprove these. And for bonus points, start listing those Trump political persecutions being done to Democrats. Maybe there are some. Otherwise, let's see if you must consider calling yourself a liar.

Trump did not run on "Lock her up". It was a saying at his rallies that caught on. He did not go after her because it was against form and fashion to go after your political foes. Do you remember when Conservative had character? I wish he would have had her investigated. She would be rotting in prison right now...where she belongs.

Trump fought against the spending bills given to him. He even shut down the government because of it. Do you remember that? Can't you get anything right?

Again, you are horrible at revising history to fit your TDS filled criteria. You have proven that you cannot analyze other people. It is laughable when you try. And yes, you should feel physically hurt when you are this stupid...if you had character.

What lies will you reply with now? Maybe get Big Girl to help you because you are doing a terrible job on your own.

 

You gotta remember, you're talking to a guy that can't vote for Trump (the third time, anyway) because of his high moral standards, while admitting in the past that he worshipped the ground that Bill Clinton walked on and thought he was the best president of all times.

Good stuff.

3 minutes ago, baddog said:

If only he had put them beside the Vette in the garage, we would hear not a peep. 

lol, 100% true.

TDS appears to even affect some "conservatives".

Can't wait to get started on the wall again.  Of course, new material will have to be brought in because I'm sure all the lay-down yards have been pillaged with the stamp of approval from this administration.

2 hours ago, Reagan said:

 

 

Tough news for the snowflakes.

3 minutes ago, Big girl said:

He does not have an open door policy for illegal immigrants

Yes, he does, you really should read more on subjects before commenting.

From the article:

Since President Joe Biden took office in January 2021, his administration has acted on a number of fronts to reverse Trump-era restrictions on immigration to the United States. The steps include plans to boost refugee admissions, preserving deportation relief for unauthorized immigrants who came to the U.S. as children and not enforcing the “public charge” rule that denies green cards to immigrants who might use public benefits like Medicaid.

Biden has also lifted restrictions established early in the coronavirus pandemic that drastically reduced the number of visas issued to immigrants. The number of people who received a green card declined from about 240,000 in the second quarter of the 2020 fiscal year (January to March) to about 79,000 in the third quarter (April to June). By comparison, in the third quarter of fiscal 2019, nearly 266,000 people received a green card.

Biden’s biggest immigration proposal to date would allow more new immigrants into the U.S. while giving millions of unauthorized immigrants who are already in the country a pathway to legal status. The expansive legislation would create an eight-year path to citizenship for the nation’s estimated 10.5 million unauthorized immigrants, update the existing family-based immigration system, revise employment-based visa rules and increase the number of diversity visas. By contrast, President Donald Trump’s administration sought to restrict legal immigration in a variety of ways, including through legislation that would have overhauled the nation’s legal immigration system by sharply reducing family-based immigration.

2 hours ago, Big girl said:

Where can you get a loan without having a social security number?

It’s really not that hard to google stuff and I have no interest in doing it for you.

6 hours ago, Reagan said:

 

 

Sound about right.

18 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

Actually, not voting is the same as voting for the winner, and you just admitted Trump is gonna lose again. 
 

Wanna know how “they” already know? They claim that the election was stolen in 2020, but here we are and there’s not a single Republican doing ANYTHING to make sure that it doesn’t happen again. They’re not even talking about how to stop the cheating. They’re not scared of it because they know the truth-it didn’t happen in 2020. 

Got that Stetson on, I see.

9 minutes ago, CardinalBacker said:

No, I won’t vote Biden, but I’m part of the “1 in 7 Republicans who are vowing not to vote at all if Trump is the nominee.”

So you are voting Biden.

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.