bullets13

I'm plenty in tune with this area. I grew up here, I even attended ETBU for 4 years, which really dials you into the mindset of conservative east texas. That's why I knew that the parent they interviewed who had a problem with this would have a strong country drawl and the prerequisite camo hat before I saw the interview. Thats also why i agreed with you that my viewpoints might seem radical to some in setx. I don't disagree with you that there will be plenty of people in SETX who would raise a stink. But you said this teacher would be welcomed in very few places. I disagree. Your viewpoint is VERY southeast texas. I'm not criticizing that, but a good chunk of the country does not share the ideologies of this area. I'm not claiming to have polled parents from Lumberton... But don't believe that the viewpoints of some parents from lumberton will line up with people in all places.

SOME lumberton parents have a problem with it. I only brought that up because you called me a "radical" for not having a problem with it. So I asked two non-political people and one conservative person around me and they didn't care either. So maybe I'm not as radical as you think, or maybe you're not quite as in tune with "most places" as you might believe.

I love Roger Beard's interview for the piece: "there's some things we can accept in society that children are not gonna accept the same way that we do." Not really sure what that's supposed to mean. Later he says "they can do many things in life, but if it affects the young people, and their ability to learn and GROW NATURALLY, I think there's an issue with that." Ah, you had me until that last part. He tries to make it sound like he doesn't have a problem with transgenders, that he's only worried that its a distraction to the kids, but that one little comment belies what he's trying to portray. How is an educated sub doing their job going to affect children's ability to "grow naturally?" Oh yeah, I forgot, there are still people out there that think homosexuality or transgenderism is "catching". Just own up to your bias and admit you're uncomfortable with the situation! I can at least respect that viewpoint. But don't hide behind the "distraction" excuse! This sub had worked at this school before with no complaints. I guess only kids with parents who are uncomfortable with this topic get "distracted" by it.

I just talked to my wife and mom, neither of whom are politically active, and neither had a problem with this. Interestingly enough, I also talked to my 60-year-old conservative stepdad, who votes republican and dislikes Obama as much as you guys, and his first question: was she doing her job? Second question: did she dress inappropriate? No? Then why would I care. His kid went through lumberton schools, coincidentally enough.

[Hidden Content]

That might be a radical viewpoint in parts of southeast texas, but not in large parts of the country. I wouldn't want her teaching sex ed, if that makes you feel any better. I saw on Facebook she's got a degree in physics and is also a pilot. Certainly sounds more accomplished than most of the seat fillers that districts use as subs.

Hahaha, I don't watch fox, although I do look at it when I try to verify some of the cockamamie "news pieces" on here. But it's funny how defensive you guys got. I just thought it was funny as hell. Who do you guys think will win the NAACP women's national championship tonight? It's the first time in the history of NAACP basketball that two undefeated teams have competed for a NAACP championship. :)

was his/her performance on par with other subs?  did he/her dress appropriately or in a provocative outfit?  did he/her try to push an agenda on the kids, or simply perform his/her duties? those are all questions i'd need answered before i was bothered by this. 

there are dozens, if not hundreds of politicians on BOTH sides of the aisle who rival Obama's unfounded arrogance, but i'll agree, Holder is certainly one of the crowd.

[Hidden Content]    

every article i've read online, whether from cnn or from the right, has basically said "Ted Cruz can run for president... probably."    either way, i can't wait to watch the birthers justify their support of him, as his ability to run is certainly on more shaky ground than Obama's, who'm they tried to claim was ineligible. 

you wanna explain it for me?  because in several places i've seen it stated exactly how i said it on here.

i'm not talking about numbers.  i'm talking about comparable intelligence.

I'm not applauding him, just stating an opinion.  In MY opinion, it was one of the few things that he did that actually helped his cause.  I'd say those that voted for him twice are pretty much on par with those that claimed a conspiracy theory about his location of birth.  neither proved to be particularly intelligent.

Waiting to release his birth certificate might be one of the few things Obama has gotten right, as it took attention off of his 1st term failures and in the process made a lot of people on the opposite side look ridiculous.

Haha, we have a birther! I guess you'll definitely agree Cruz shouldn't be allowed to run then?

[Hidden Content]

Was he? What I saw on the presidential requirements was being born in the states, or being born outside of the states to TWO American citizens. He satisfies neither of those criteria. He actually is in the exact same position that the birther conspiracists claimed Obama was in, which was allegedly being born out of the country with only one citizen as a parent. Cruz was born in Canada, and his father was not naturalized as a US citizen until 2005.

Here's what will be interesting... Birthers claimed that Obama should not qualify to be president because he didn't satisfy the constitutional requirements based on the "fact" that he wasn't born in the US, and only had one parent that was a US citizen. Now you have Ted Cruz, who follows their ideologies, but it is an ACTUAL fact that he was born out of the country to only one American parent. I'm really curious to see the rationale that will be used to support him by the same people who tried to have Obama removed under what they claimed were the same circumstances.

I wholeheartedly agree on this. Also, no Medicaid for kids if their parents smoke in the house. I don't know how many students I've had who came in stinking of smoke all the time who had chronic allergies and sinus infections.

if the requirements I'm seeing to be a president or VP are still the same, I really don't think Cruz is eligible for either office.

  no doubt you're a radical in today's political climate. it's no insult. it just means you're far-right, and as times change, and things on both sides shift to the center, you'll become more and more radical. it's no more an insult than if i called you an "ultra-conservative".

    yes, i would. wouldn't you? radical right is assigned to politicians who are staunchly ultra-conservative. again, i'm not using the term "radical" as an insult.

Thanks to the dragging death there many years ago, "Jasper" is more likely to get them some press time.

i mean, why even regulate the environment at all. to be honest, if the GOP had their way, we'd be catching speckled trout with two heads with all of the pollution they'd allow big oil to put out. so the question is this: no regulation, or too much regulation? I'd prefer moderate regulation, but unfortunately, neither side wants to provide that option.