bullets13

I'm sure that there is still the occasional case of discrimination that it remedies, but I believe it perpetrates many more cases of reverse discrimination, which goes against the purpose it is supposed to serve.

Steve and I get along fine, but we don't cut each other any slack. Given the opportunity, he will BOOM ROAST KAPOW the crap out of me.

You know the sources aren't valid. I refuse to believe you don't know better. I actually doubt you even read the links. But someone's known shortcomings does not mean that every lie told about them should be taken as fact. For instance, it would be unfair for me to take the fact that you choose to believe this swill (or at least pretend you do), and thus use that knowledge as a basis to believe everything Big Girl says about you. Nash buys into fake propaganda articles? Well, he must be racist too because big girl says so. It just doesn't make sense. The same principles apply to Obama. Just because he screwed some things up doesn't mean that every lie or misquote attributed to him should be taken as fact.

I guess if I take liberty with 1000 more quotes Smitty and I'll be even. And since you never question him, always giving a very serious response to his posts, I guess I owe you 1000 more as well.

I don't believe he's saying nobody should be on it. He's simply saying that those who treat it as a career rather than a tool to get a leg up should not be allowed to do so. That is not hypocritical.

Diving again? Someone deserves a spanking!

I support food stamps and government assistance. I do not support them as a career choice for those who are too lazy to work. Him not wanting to foot the bill for the lazy does not make him an Uncle Tom.

When the subject intentionally misquotes people to fit the narrative they're trying to spin, this creating a fake talking point, I'd say it's unworthy to be posted.

Wow. Unbelievable! You don't understand the very valid point he made? SMH

I DO know. The way the propaganda site "quoted" it is much more inflammatory, and better riles up its "low information readers".

At one time it was needed to ensure people like big girl's dad a shot at getting hired when they DESERVED to get hired. Now it seems that more often than not it is used to get chances that are given at the expense of better candidates. If your scores are good enough, you'll get the scholarship or the job if you deserve it, regardless of race now. And in situations where someone is passed over unfairly, our legal system can now be trusted to make things right. To me, affirmative action is an outdated law that now discriminates against deserving applicants, which counters the reasons it was established in the first place.

That passage did not come out of your "book of facts". That is someone's interpretive opinion formed from THEIR interpretation of your "book of facts".

I was smashing TVC but he made a nice rally at the end

Huh? Factual? It's just one big long opinion.

He's 2 legit to quit... Like Calvin Walker.

If one president doesn't act on a major problem, that does not excuse the next president to also not act on that problem. That being said, most of the "identical" situations that are posed in these threads of Big Girl's have obvious and fundamental differences which are pointed out, and then blindly ignored.

Unchecked spending, theft, mismanagement, and contracts awarded by nepotism rather than quality and cost, just to name a few reasons.

I agree that it shouldn't be as simple as showing up. But the prerequisites in place don't make sense to me. Being allowed to come in on a work visa and proving your worth should be the main requirement, IMO, rather than having a relative sponsor you, or being born here to illegals.

It will be interesting to see how a trial goes with BISD's cooperation, as opposed to the first trial, with the old regime that refused to acknowledge that they were victims, even going so far as to renew his contract.

Good deal.

Because its an extensive beaurocratic process that often has tons of red tape. And some immigrants don't qualify. I agree with you that our tax dollars should not support them. I just argue that it should be easier, not harder to gain citizenship, which would greatly increase tax revenue, while simultaneously greatly decrease handouts and the expenditures that go along with them.

While I'm not in agreement with y'all on shipping back immigrants who want to live here, I AM in agreement with y'all that we should ship back CRIMINALS who want to live here.

We don't need a fence. We need a system in place that properly taxes immigrants and does not reward them with freebies and handouts when they get here. If someone wants to move to the US and become a productive, taxpaying member of society, great! All of us on here come from families of immigrants, unless we have some pure native Americans on here I don't know about. But their being here should be at a benefit to our country, not a detriment. We should be making tax dollars off of them, not spending tax dollars on them. An aside to that, criminals need to be deported. You want to live here, you get one chance to follow the rules.

And if "Caesar" misuses those taxes and you suffer for it while those who choose not to work benefit??? It's cool because "Caesar" is really a good tax collector who is only criticized because of his race. Do I have that right?

All you did was gripe about coaching most of his senior year. Now you say you weren't mad?