WHY DEMOCRATS ARE COMMIE PINKOS!!!!!!!

[ConfederateSS]

---------------SO LIBERAL LEFT NEW YORK CITY......ELECTED A LITERALLY COMMIE PINKO AS MAYOR....Zohran Mamdani......
------------------Million ares and Billion ares are fleeing NEW YORK CITY.....WAIT IT GETS BETTER......YOU WON'T BELIEVE THIS...WORDS OUT OF MAMDANI...
-------------------ON PEOPLE FREEZING TO DEATH ON THE STREETS OF NEW YORK CITY..."PEOPLE DIE IN THEIR HOMES ALL THE TIME...".... WOW ...Well maybe in NYC , people die in their homes, in their cars....IN CENTRAL PARK,ALL OVER NYC......But by stabbings , gun shots....But by snow and ice ...ouch...
---------------------------I have a better idea....Have classes in the park....HOW TO BUILD IGLOOs... .......
---------------------------I remember when I was little.....We had these plastic box ,snow block makers......We used to build our own IGLOOs.... ...Also snow forts, have snowball fights....I don't know if they sell those anymore... ... ConfederateSS.out!(The Blue and Silver Rebellion)...

[jusplay4fun]

This took long enough, despite the endorsements by Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren and other prominent Democrats, who FAILED to "Believe women" on allegations of rape and other similar misconduct. An is he also an anti-Semite? Check the tattoos, before the "cover-up" by the meida and leftist and Platner himself. So much for another darling of the Left; another Liberal Leftist Loser.

Graham Platner drops out of Senate race, allowing Maine Democrats to replace him

His decision comes within days of a key deadline, allowing Maine’s Democratic Party to select a new candidate to face Republican Sen. Susan Collins in a critical contest for Senate control.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2026-e ... rcna353199

MS NOW host Lawrence O’Donnell on Tuesday revealed one thing he has “always known” about Maine’s Democratic U.S. Senate candidate Graham Platner, the oysterman accused Monday of sexually assaulting a woman in 2021: namely that he “cannot believe him.”
(...)

“Whenever a new unknown candidate who has never been vetted in any way suddenly surges and creates pundit excitement, I always, from experience, just stay quiet and wait for the vetting,” O’Donnell said Tuesday.

The “Last Word” host continued, “And I knew with a candidacy like Graham Platner that the vetting would come from the news media. And so it has. And every stage of that vetting — every stage of it — has been disturbing.”

Platner’s campaign has been marred by scandals, including a skull-and-crossbones tattoo with historical connotations to the Nazis, which he has since covered up, explicit messages he allegedly sent to women outside his marriage and online comments he posted about rape.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/lawrence ... d71e712e96

[Apatheist]

What we want politicians to think is: Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?
What they actually think is: What's in it for me? How will I get away with it? How will it benefit my career?

In some respects, this is one reason why space exploration, although essential for the survival of the species, is a negative thing. It would be nice to think that any space colonies would be established on solid lines that learned from the mistakes of the past; but whether it's politicians, scientists, oligarchs or the military that are in charge, human flaws will always mean that it goes wrong somewhere along the line.

[jusplay4fun]

What we want politicians to think is: Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?
What they actually think is: What's in it for me? How will I get away with it? How will it benefit my career?

In some respects, this is one reason why space exploration, although essential for the survival of the species, is a negative thing. It would be nice to think that any space colonies would be established on solid lines that learned from the mistakes of the past; but whether it's politicians, scientists, oligarchs or the military that are in charge, human flaws will always mean that it goes wrong somewhere along the line.

Yes, we definitely hope that politicians are motivated by more than "What's in it for me?" YES, we certainly hope politicians are motivated by considering: "Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?"

Apatheist, I am not sure how your comments relate directly to many Democrat Socialists in the USA. They seem to me to be motivated by bad ideology. Some even label them to be Communists. Platner is an example of a terrible person who tried to use ideology of the Socialist Democrats to get elected to an important political office. Thank goodness he is OUT. He shows that the Democrats only really want political power; at times, this goes against the supposedly genuine concern for women who accused the rich and powerful of mistreating and abusing women.

[Apatheist]

What we want politicians to think is: Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?
What they actually think is: What's in it for me? How will I get away with it? How will it benefit my career?

In some respects, this is one reason why space exploration, although essential for the survival of the species, is a negative thing. It would be nice to think that any space colonies would be established on solid lines that learned from the mistakes of the past; but whether it's politicians, scientists, oligarchs or the military that are in charge, human flaws will always mean that it goes wrong somewhere along the line.

Yes, we definitely hope that politicians are motivated by more than "What's in it for me?" YES, we certainly hope politicians are motivated by considering: "Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?"

Apatheist, I am not sure how your comments relate directly to many Democrat Socialists in the USA. They seem to me to be motivated by bad ideology. Some even label them to be Communists. Platner is an example of a terrible person who tried to use ideology of the Socialist Democrats to get elected to an important political office. Thank goodness he is OUT. He shows that the Democrats only really want political power; at times, this goes against the supposedly genuine concern for women who accused the rich and powerful of mistreating and abusing women.

I read that in UK terms, Democrats would be considered centrist, and are some way to the right of what we would consider socialists.

[Dukasaur]

What we want politicians to think is: Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?
What they actually think is: What's in it for me? How will I get away with it? How will it benefit my career?

In some respects, this is one reason why space exploration, although essential for the survival of the species, is a negative thing. It would be nice to think that any space colonies would be established on solid lines that learned from the mistakes of the past; but whether it's politicians, scientists, oligarchs or the military that are in charge, human flaws will always mean that it goes wrong somewhere along the line.

Yes, we definitely hope that politicians are motivated by more than "What's in it for me?" YES, we certainly hope politicians are motivated by considering: "Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?"

Apatheist, I am not sure how your comments relate directly to many Democrat Socialists in the USA. They seem to me to be motivated by bad ideology. Some even label them to be Communists. Platner is an example of a terrible person who tried to use ideology of the Socialist Democrats to get elected to an important political office. Thank goodness he is OUT. He shows that the Democrats only really want political power; at times, this goes against the supposedly genuine concern for women who accused the rich and powerful of mistreating and abusing women.

I read that in UK terms, Democrats would be considered centrist, and are some way to the right of what we would consider socialists.

Yes. In almost any country, U.S. Democrats would be considered centrist. Only in the the right-wing morass of American politics is it considered a "radical left" idea that (for instance) people should be able to get a university education without either being born rich or mortgaging themselves for the next 20 years.

[DirtyDishSoap]

What Duk said. We somehow have a society of archaic thinkers while the rest of the modern world just points and laughs at us for being so ass backwards.

[jusplay4fun]

What we want politicians to think is: Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?
What they actually think is: What's in it for me? How will I get away with it? How will it benefit my career?

In some respects, this is one reason why space exploration, although essential for the survival of the species, is a negative thing. It would be nice to think that any space colonies would be established on solid lines that learned from the mistakes of the past; but whether it's politicians, scientists, oligarchs or the military that are in charge, human flaws will always mean that it goes wrong somewhere along the line.

Yes, we definitely hope that politicians are motivated by more than "What's in it for me?" YES, we certainly hope politicians are motivated by considering: "Is it legal? Is it moral? How can I benefit the country (or city, state or whatever area they represent)?"

Apatheist, I am not sure how your comments relate directly to many Democrat Socialists in the USA. They seem to me to be motivated by bad ideology. Some even label them to be Communists. Platner is an example of a terrible person who tried to use ideology of the Socialist Democrats to get elected to an important political office. Thank goodness he is OUT. He shows that the Democrats only really want political power; at times, this goes against the supposedly genuine concern for women who accused the rich and powerful of mistreating and abusing women.

I read that in UK terms, Democrats would be considered centrist, and are some way to the right of what we would consider socialists.

Yes. In almost any country, U.S. Democrats would be considered centrist. Only in the the right-wing morass of American politics is it considered a "radical left" idea that (for instance) people should be able to get a university education without either being born rich or mortgaging themselves for the next 20 years.

Some 50-100 Years ago, a 4 year Bachelor's degree meant one (mostly men and female Nurses, Registered Nurses) were going to do fine financially and in society, in general. That began to change, some 30-40 or so years ago where one needed a Good Master's degree to insure such financial well-being was LIKELY. Getting into college and PAYING for it meant, for many students and for many years, sacrifice and delayed gratification and hard work. College was EARNED and not a privilege, as Duk apparently thinks is NEEDED. I disagree with the notion of a college privilege. BAD idea.

I earned my way through colleges, working nearly ALL summer to earn money for my expenses. So did my 2 children, BUT I knew when they were younger than ten years old that they would need help from Mom and Dad to be able to afford college. We sacrificed so that they both could earn a Bachelor's degree and have a low level of student loans when they Graduated. The WHOLE family sacrificed. My son once asked me why I did not have a big inventory of CDs for music. I told him that I sacrificed music so that that money could be used INSTEAD to help finance his (and his sister's) college degree.

I know a visitor who came from Japan and was very impressed how hard my youngest brother was studying in college. He, like the rest of us, EARNED our money to attend college. He wanted to get into Optometry School, which he did, and has done very well financially. (btw: that is where he met his wife and they both do very well together.) In Japan, JUST getting to college was the "Trick" as employers did not want their Japanese college graduated all stressed from LOTS of work in College. Work and stress came on the Job, after college graduation. The Japanese have a different view of college.

What nation has the Best Graduate Schools in the world? where college is a privilege and not really earned, or INSTEAD where merely getting accepted into a good university is very competitive? Competition wins.

https://www.usnews.com/education/best-g ... s/rankings

The Top Canadian school was #20, behind mostly US and a few schools in the UK + China. (Top 40 listed).

And here are the Top MBA programs in the world. Who Leads? NOT Canada, Duk. I did not see a Canada school in the Top 20.
https://www.okcourses.com/rankings/mba?ccid=4820990520

And those with staggering college debts (in the US) often have degrees, Master's and/or Bachelor's, that are simply NOT marketable and do not lead to good jobs with good incomes. Hence they struggle pay their loans. Again, my Master's degree was paid by ME, not given to me. What is earned is appreciated and cherished and one is PROUD to say I EARNED both my degrees. Can the same be said for those who are "given" the money for a degree?

[Apatheist]

Milton Jones:

To pay for my education, my parents had to make a lot of sacrifices...but then, they were both Druids...

(ps Apologies to Druids, I know you don't).


In the UK, when I went to uni, we were given a grant by the local council, which covered accommodation and living expenses. These days they charge tuition fees, which they didn't in my day, and there was a big fuss about it about 15 years ago.
Personally I don't see tertiary education as a right, but nor should it be the preserve of the wealthy. Loans don't have to be repaid until one earns a decent salary or higher; student loan repayment thresholds depend on the specific plan you are on, which is determined by when and where you studied. Repayments are automatically deducted from your income at a rate of 9% (6% for Postgraduate loans) on the amount you earn above the specific threshold. The threshold is around 2/3 the median salary in England.

I would say though that anyone who has worked hard feels that they've EARNED it, regardless of how much of the cost of it they've paid.

[Dukasaur]

College was EARNED and not a privilege, as Duk apparently thinks is NEEDED. I disagree with the notion of a college privilege. BAD idea.

"Privilege" is a bit of a distraction.

In the end, it's a strategic national decision. China graduates 1.5 million engineers every year, more than ten times as many as the U.S., which is why China is now ahead of the U.S. in every technological category. If you want only the very rich to be able to afford an engineering degree, that's a decision which will help the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. In the end, it's why the American Empire is failing, but you'll die of old age before the end so you won't care.

[jusplay4fun]

College was EARNED and not a privilege, as Duk apparently thinks is NEEDED. I disagree with the notion of a college privilege. BAD idea.

"Privilege" is a bit of a distraction.

In the end, it's a strategic national decision. China graduates 1.5 million engineers every year, more than ten times as many as the U.S., which is why China is now ahead of the U.S. in every technological category. If you want only the very rich to be able to afford an engineering degree, that's a decision which will help the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. In the end, it's why the American Empire is failing, but you'll die of old age before the end so you won't care.

Several responses to Duk here:

First of all, NOT all engineers are RICH folks or their offsprings. Fallacy #1.

#2, I do care and especially for my four grandchildren (and others, too, such as many of my students, including those I teach NOW).

#3 America STILL allows those to succeed based on their MERITS and on their EFFORTS, not based on famiy wealth. America is STILL the Land of Opportunity. Elon Musk is an immigrant and an engineer. Why did he come to the USA? Opportunity, and that was before he met Trump.

China has a population of what? 1.2 Billion, so of course they would graduate more engineers. And that is NOT the only measure of Technological supremacy. Fallacy #4.

Duk responds to only one ("privilege") of my many points in my previous post and apparently ignores the rest of my post. So be it.

Question for Duk: Is the Canadian "Way" so much better and more equitable and more perfect than how things are done in the USA, especially as it relates to Higher (tertiary or college) education? I see NO evidence that it is, but I am willing to consider evidence to the contrary.

[Dukasaur]

College was EARNED and not a privilege, as Duk apparently thinks is NEEDED. I disagree with the notion of a college privilege. BAD idea.

"Privilege" is a bit of a distraction.

In the end, it's a strategic national decision. China graduates 1.5 million engineers every year, more than ten times as many as the U.S., which is why China is now ahead of the U.S. in every technological category. If you want only the very rich to be able to afford an engineering degree, that's a decision which will help the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor. In the end, it's why the American Empire is failing, but you'll die of old age before the end so you won't care.

Several responses to Duk here:

First of all, NOT all engineers are RICH folks or their offsprings. Fallacy #1.

Red herring. It does not matter if "all" engineers are rich folk or their offspring. It only matters that a poor person has little chance to ever accumulate enough money to go to a good engineering school. Sure, some will get an entrance scholarship or some other method, but the overwhelming majority never will.

#2, I do care and especially for my four grandchildren (and others, too, such as many of my students, including those I teach NOW).

I didn't ask if you care now . I said that by the time the American Empire finally collapses, you will have died of old age and will not care any longer.

#3 America STILL allows those to succeed based on their MERITS and on their EFFORTS, not based on famiy wealth. America is STILL the Land of Opportunity. Elon Musk is an immigrant and an engineer. Why did he come to the USA? Opportunity, and that was before he met Trump.

Yeah, America is still a great place for very ambitious people to get rich. It's also one of the worst places to be poor. While the Elons live in wealth and splendour, the streets fill with homeless and people in extreme poverty.

Anyway, none of the above are really direct to my point.

Here, we at last get to something that addresses my point:

China has a population of what? 1.2 Billion, so of course they would graduate more engineers.

China has a population of about 1.2 billion, yes. The U.S. has a population of about 300 million. So it's reasonable to assume that China would graduate about four times as many, not ten times as many. (Actually, close to 11 times -- 1.5 million versus 130 thousand is almost 11 times more.) If you were producing engineers at the same rate per capita, you would be graduating about half a million annually, not 130,000.

And that is NOT the only measure of Technological supremacy. Fallacy #4.

I never said it was a "measure" of technological supremacy. I said it was the reason for it.

That China has overtaken the U.S. in almost every category of technology is undeniable. The Chinese zoom from town to town on high-speed rail, while Americans chug along on gridlocked highways, spewing toxic fumes. China produces electricity at a quarter of the cost. It has completely taken leadership of the renewables market. In some Chinese provinces, there is so much solar power that electricity is almost free during the day and is only billed at night. Chinese electric cars are a generation ahead of any of the garbage that Elon produces, and the only reason your people are driving Tesla shit instead of BYD is import barriers. While American robots are still mostly experimental toys, Chinese robots are actively out in the workforce, so that the "demographic bomb" of an aging population has become completely irrelevant. On the most cutting-edge computer chips, the U.S. still has a tiny edge, but among more affordable midrange chips, the Chinese are producing vastly greater quantities and arguably greater quality at the same time.

All this is made possible by the fact that smart people are allowed to get a good education even if they come from the lowest scum in the ghetto.

Duk responds to only one ("privilege") of my many points in my previous post and apparently ignores the rest of my post. So be it.

Yes, I focused in on the relevant point and excised all the others.

In this post, I did the opposite. I answered all the points, even the irrelevant ones. I hope this is more to your liking.

Question for Duk: Is the Canadian "Way" so much better and more equitable and more perfect than how things are done in the USA, especially as it relates to Higher (tertiary or college) education? I see NO evidence that it is, but I am willing to consider evidence to the contrary.

Did I say it was that much better? No. It is somewhat better, but not to any great degree. Our systems have more similarities than differences.

I don't know if you think you'll get a rise out of me by bringing up the "Canadian Way" but you won't. I'm happy to be Canadian, but unlike you, I am capable of being objective about my country's imperfections.

Anyway, I know you like to drift off the point, but let's get back to actual basis of this thread. The thread originates with Confed smearing Democrats as "Commies" and from there continued with Apath's point that in any other country, they would be considered centrist. That point remains correct. In no country on earth except yours is it considered an "extreme left" position that the government should help people get a quality education. Different countries have different strategies for how to approach it, but in no other country would it get you labelled a "Commie". The Left may approach the topic from a point of view of social equity, while the Right may approach the topic from a position of strategic necessity, but both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost.

[jusplay4fun]

Did I say it was that much better? No. It is somewhat better, but not to any great degree. Our systems have more similarities than differences.

I don't know if you think you'll get a rise out of me by bringing up the "Canadian Way" but you won't. I'm happy to be Canadian, but unlike you, I am capable of being objective about my country's imperfections.

Get a rise? No, just comparing Canada to USA and see what differences you see, since you want to focus MAINLY on the shortcomings of the USA. Does any country avoid poverty? NO, unless there is some LITTLE nation with The Rich and their servants that almost NO ONE knows about.

Does Canada produce enough engineers? Just a question.

And I do SEE and at times acknowledge imperfections of Trump and the USA. You are not the only one who can offer objective evaluations. In this Forum, I spend lots of time defending the USA from silly attacks, wrong statements, cursory evaluations, and very biased opinions that are, to me at least, anti-American (i.e., anti-Trump and anti-USA, which are OFTEN the same these days).

Anyway, I know you like to drift off the point, but let's get back to actual basis of this thread. The thread originates with Confed smearing Democrats as "Commies" and from there continued with Apath's point that in any other country, they would be considered centrist. That point remains correct. In no country on earth except yours is it considered an "extreme left" position that the government should help people get a quality education. Different countries have different strategies for how to approach it, but in no other country would it get you labelled a "Commie". The Left may approach the topic from a point of view of social equity, while the Right may approach the topic from a position of strategic necessity, but both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost.

We discussed quality education above; I assume that you read that. I am not attacking the Left for the education ideas, at least not here or in any posts. Twice in my teaching career, I was a member of the NEA.

I think we can

both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost

Such a system serves the nation and the those educated and those who benefit from the work of bright people, which is nearly ALL of us.

I am certified in Gifted Education, and have one of the FIRST such endorsements to teach such in VA (and likely the USA). [btw: I attempt to challenge and educate ALL my students. One of my recent students, who is now a famous sports star, thanked for challenging him in my class as I prepared him and other students for more challenges in LIFE. I told him that I try to CHALLENGE ALL my students at their level to do better and to LEARN and to understand the value of studying and hard work. I KNOW the value of teaching bright people, those that are referred to as "Gifted." And I knew that BEFORE I got my Gifted Endorsement, but have had more data and facts to refer to support such needed fiscal expenditures.]

One of my brothers was one of the first to receive extra education and opportunities in our state during this same time. He is an engineer, btw; graduated at the top of his class. I gave him credit for CREATING jobs when he managed a local manufacturing plant/facility, unlike most politician who want to claim credit and get in the photo and DO little to actually spur manufacturing and job creation. btw2: I taught him both Chemistry and Physics and I KNOW how bright he is, and knew that before he came into my classroom.

I understand the math of the number of engineers. Engineering is a very DIFFICULT major in the USA, now and when I was in college, too. In fact, at my college, Engineering was call "Pre-Business" since many who could NOT do Engineering opted to go into (SWITCHED to) Business, a MUCH easier degree. I only encourage MY BEST students with a math and science aptitude to consider an Engineering degree. Many students want the easy way OUT instead of Engneering and hard work and LOTS of study. They find the easier way in Business or Psychology or....name it. THAT is ONE BIG reason we do not have enough Engineers in this nation; it is difficult and there are MANY other OPPORTUNTIES for a college degree, many of which lead to productive lives and a decent salary. I wonder how many Engineers in China ARE FORCED ("strong encouraged") to study engineering and do NOT have the option of (for example) Music Production, Mass Communication, or Physical Education instead.

[Apatheist]

JP - do you write your college NOTES with random capitalisation? Just wondering.

[Dukasaur]

JP - do you write your college NOTES with random capitalisation? Just wondering.

Before I forget, I will rise on a Point of Information and defend JP on this score. I've heard it said that the best writing conveys the sound of human speech. To that end, one has only a limited number of tactics to employ. Use of capitalization and italics are legitimate ways to indicate places where your voice would rise, if you were in actual spoken conversation.

I am certified in Gifted Education, and have one of the FIRST such endorsements to teach such in VA (and likely the USA). [btw: I attempt to challenge and educate ALL my students. One of my recent students, who is now a famous sports star, thanked for challenging him in my class as I prepared him and other students for more challenges in LIFE. I told him that I try to CHALLENGE ALL my students at their level to do better and to LEARN and to understand the value of studying and hard work. I KNOW the value of teaching bright people, those that are referred to as "Gifted." And I knew that BEFORE I got my Gifted Endorsement, but have had more data and facts to refer to support such needed fiscal expenditures.]

Well, congratulations on that score.

I wonder how many Engineers in China ARE FORCED ("strong encouraged") to study engineering and do NOT have the option of (for example) Music Production, Mass Communication, or Physical Education instead.

I don't disagree. That is the flip side of the coin. With state subsidy comes state control. I know my previous post sounded like I was glorifying the Chinese state. I don't. I know they are very technologically advanced. On the other hand, I know it's a murderous, repressive regime, and I certainly wouldn't want to live there.

It was necessary to contrast China and the U.S., since they are the two empires currently vying for world economic domination. If I was fishing around for a system I "like", it would more likely be Finland or Slovenia or something like that. But none of those is in contention to rule the world.

Anyway, I know you like to drift off the point, but let's get back to actual basis of this thread. The thread originates with Confed smearing Democrats as "Commies" and from there continued with Apath's point that in any other country, they would be considered centrist. That point remains correct. In no country on earth except yours is it considered an "extreme left" position that the government should help people get a quality education. Different countries have different strategies for how to approach it, but in no other country would it get you labelled a "Commie". The Left may approach the topic from a point of view of social equity, while the Right may approach the topic from a position of strategic necessity, but both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost.

We discussed quality education above; I assume that you read that. I am not attacking the Left for the education ideas, at least not here or in any posts. Twice in my teaching career, I was a member of the NEA.

I think we can

both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost

Such a system serves the nation and the those educated and those who benefit from the work of bright people, which is nearly ALL of us.

So, we're ultimately not that far apart.

Does Canada produce enough engineers? Just a question.

No, not nearly enough. But we have a more liberal immigration policy which helps to compensate. In the division I work in, there are eight engineers. Four, a full half, are Arabs from various Middle Eastern states. Two are from India. One is from Kenya. One is from El Salvador. Not a single one is born here.

[jusplay4fun]

JP - do you write your college NOTES with random capitalisation? Just wondering.

Before I forget, I will rise on a Point of Information and defend JP on this score. I've heard it said that the best writing conveys the sound of human speech. To that end, one has only a limited number of tactics to employ. Use of capitalization and italics are legitimate ways to indicate places where your voice would rise, if you were in actual spoken conversation.

I am certified in Gifted Education, and have one of the FIRST such endorsements to teach such in VA (and likely the USA). [btw: I attempt to challenge and educate ALL my students. One of my recent students, who is now a famous sports star, thanked for challenging him in my class as I prepared him and other students for more challenges in LIFE. I told him that I try to CHALLENGE ALL my students at their level to do better and to LEARN and to understand the value of studying and hard work. I KNOW the value of teaching bright people, those that are referred to as "Gifted." And I knew that BEFORE I got my Gifted Endorsement, but have had more data and facts to refer to support such needed fiscal expenditures.]

Well, congratulations on that score.

I wonder how many Engineers in China ARE FORCED ("strong encouraged") to study engineering and do NOT have the option of (for example) Music Production, Mass Communication, or Physical Education instead.

I don't disagree. That is the flip side of the coin. With state subsidy comes state control. I know my previous post sounded like I was glorifying the Chinese state. I don't. I know they are very technologically advanced. On the other hand, I know it's a murderous, repressive regime, and I certainly wouldn't want to live there.

It was necessary to contrast China and the U.S., since they are the two empires currently vying for world economic domination. If I was fishing around for a system I "like", it would more likely be Finland or Slovenia or something like that. But none of those is in contention to rule the world.

Anyway, I know you like to drift off the point, but let's get back to actual basis of this thread. The thread originates with Confed smearing Democrats as "Commies" and from there continued with Apath's point that in any other country, they would be considered centrist. That point remains correct. In no country on earth except yours is it considered an "extreme left" position that the government should help people get a quality education. Different countries have different strategies for how to approach it, but in no other country would it get you labelled a "Commie". The Left may approach the topic from a point of view of social equity, while the Right may approach the topic from a position of strategic necessity, but both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost.

We discussed quality education above; I assume that you read that. I am not attacking the Left for the education ideas, at least not here or in any posts. Twice in my teaching career, I was a member of the NEA.

I think we can

both will agree that bright people ought to be educated regardless of whether they can bear the full cost

Such a system serves the nation and the those educated and those who benefit from the work of bright people, which is nearly ALL of us.

So, we're ultimately not that far apart.

Does Canada produce enough engineers? Just a question.

No, not nearly enough. But we have a more liberal immigration policy which helps to compensate. In the division I work in, there are eight engineers. Four, a full half, are Arabs from various Middle Eastern states. Two are from India. One is from Kenya. One is from El Salvador. Not a single one is born here.

First, Duk, thanks for the defense of my writing to EMPHASIZE certain words and try to convey the Ideas more clearly.

I will say that we agree on many things on Duk's post here that I quoted.

I doubted that Canada, like the USA, cannot produce enough Engineers. I too would NOT want to live in China under the true Communists rule either. I think that ConfedSS and Trump raise the spector of Communism to get people to react and talk about it, as we are doing here.

On a side note, I taught briefly a few foreign exchange students from Germany, Azerbaijan, Ukraine, and China. I found them all to be wonderful young people. I still exchange a few posts with my former Azerbaijani and Ukrainian students via Facebook. I did not want to put my Chinese student in a "bad spot" by suggesting we continue our aquaintance via social media. The Chinese student did tell me that his father was involved in the student uprisings manifested most significantly in Tiananmen Square. I was encouraged by that revelation, but again, I did not want to put him in any danger.

[Apatheist]

I get the need for emphasis. It's just that every now and then, it doesn't appear to be in a sensible place.
I guess it's just down to stress...

[Evil Semp]

I get the need for emphasis. It's just that every now and then, it doesn't appear to be in a sensible place.
I guess it's just down to stress...

It's more than likely from reading to many post made by Confed.

[jusplay4fun]

I agree with Evil Semp...!

I could type in HUGE and Large font and NOT use complete sentences and ......use.....LOTS of .....Ellipses...randomly....LIKE THIS

JP

and add comments after I sign OUT....like THIS.

This may be better....!!

[DirtyDishSoap]

[mookiemcgee]

Click image to enlarge.

[jimboston]

Why are they called “Pinkos”?

The Soviet color is red.

[Pack Rat]

Why are they called “Pinkos”?

The Soviet color is red.

MAGA States are RED. They are also dependent on BLUE States contributions to the US Treasury.

[jusplay4fun]

Why are they called “Pinkos”?

The Soviet color is red.

NOT quite TRUE red-blooded Commies? they were communist SYMPATHSIZERS and not full-fledged, card-carrying members...?

Mike JP

It seems AI agrees with my theory:

The term "Commie Pinko" is used to describe individuals with varying degrees of leftist beliefs, particularly in a derogatory context.

Definitions and Connotations

Pinko: This term refers to someone with left-leaning views that are not fully communist. It suggests a milder form of socialism, often associated with liberal or progressive ideologies. The term derives from the color pink, which is seen as a diluted version of red, the color of communism

Commie: This is a slang term for a communist, often used pejoratively to describe someone with more extreme communist beliefs. It carries a stronger negative connotation and is typically used as an insult

Historical Context

The use of these terms peaked during the Red Scare in the 1950s, when accusations of communism were rampant in the United States, largely fueled by Senator Joseph McCarthy's campaigns against suspected leftists

Differentiation

The distinction between "pinkos" and "red communists" lies in the perceived intensity of their beliefs. "Pinkos" are seen as less radical, while "commies" are viewed as fully committed to communist ideology

This differentiation allows for a broader range of criticism against those who may not fully align with traditional communist views but still hold leftist beliefs.

[jimboston]

Commie Pinkos seems redundant… wouldn’t of those words be sufficient?