Shocker! A Liberal Attack On Success

[bedowin62]

where i live the Walmart is full of people associated with the dem Party; shoppers and employees alike.
the Left wants to put a hurt on them

so typical

 

[bedowin62]

nobody is forced to stay at Walmart......

unless of course in this the 8th straight year of Progressive Majority rule there just arent other jobs to go to?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Two days ago the internet was flooded with articles on how the GOP intends to use privatization of education as it's platform. Now, we see a plethora of nonthinking right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart. Note that Wal-Mart employees are reliant on state aid to survive because Wal-Mart refuses to pay them. We subsidize them. Understand?

Yet, you think they are totally awesome because they drop lot o' cash in this industry.

You call this success. You, obviously, have not thought this through.

",,,,right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart...."



I sure do....as do most American folks.



1. The diverse group of self-identified liberals are better educated than the country as a whole, less religious, more urban, less married and wealthier. They support abortion and gay rights, are unconcerned about pornography, and rarely own guns.
Edsall, “ Building Red America,” p. 18.


2. The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters, as outlined in the Pew survey of 2007, “Trends in Political Values.” One example: two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart, while a majority of professional-class Democrats consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate. Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

T he public expresses highly favorable views of many leading corporations. Johnson & Johnson and Google have the most positive images of 23 corporations tested. At the bottom of the list: Halliburton, which is viewed favorably by fewer than half of those familiar enough with the company to give it a rating.
Views of many corporations vary significantly among Democrats along class lines. Two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart compared with 45% of professional-class Democrats.
Americans are worried more that businesses rather than government are snooping into their lives. About three-in-four (74%) say they are concerned that business corporations are collecting too much personal information while 58% express the same concern about the government.
The public is losing confidence in itself. A dwindling majority (57%) say they have a good deal of confidence in the wisdom of the American people when it comes to making political decisions. Similarly, the proportion who agrees that Americans “can always find a way to solve our problems” has dropped 16 points in the past five years.
Americans feel increasingly estranged from their government. Barely a third (34%) agree with the statement, “most elected officials care what people like me think,” nearly matching the 20-year low of 33% recorded in 1994 and a 10-point drop since 2002.
Young people continue to hold a more favorable view of government than do other Americans. At the same time, young adults express the least interest in voting and other forms of political participation.
Interpersonal racial attitudes continue to moderate. More than eight-in-ten (83%) agree that “it’s all right for blacks and whites to date,” up six percentage points since 2003 and 13 points from a Pew survey conducted 10 years ago.
Republicans are increasingly divided over the cultural impact of immigrants. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) conservative Republicans say immigrants threaten American customs, compared with 43% of GOP moderates and liberals. Democrats have long been divided along ideological lines, but the GOP previously had not been.

Roadmap to the Report

Section 1, which begins on p. 7, describes the striking shift in party identification over the past five years, the public’s views of both parties, and the ideological profile of the early presidential primary states. Section 2, which details the public’s views of the government safety net, success and empowerment, and personal finances, begins on p. 12. Section 3 (p. 19) covers public attitudes toward foreign policy and national security. Section 4 (p. 30) covers opinions about religion and social issues. Section 5 (p. 39) describes changing attitudes toward race and race relations. Section 6 (p. 45) discusses the public’s complex views about government and political participation. Opinions about business, and ratings for individual corporations, are covered in Section 7, which begins on p. 52. Section 8 covers public views about civil liberties, the environment, and science.
Report Materials

Complete Report
Topline Questionnaire
1987-2007 Values Surveys (combined dataset)
2007 Values Update

Table of Contents

Summary of Findings
Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

It might be better to read the original.

Did you find that your link said other than what I posted?

You are a government school grad, aren't you.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Did you, twit? So, we subsidize them now or we really pay for them later...........
Then we can throw a party for the success of Wal-Mart?

They were successful in making it our problem. It is not. Thanks for helping to screw the tax payers.

I understand that this is a Liberal meme, and, as such, you are required to repeat it ad infinitum....

...but it is so bereft of logic that it gives one pause.....I mean, one with cognitive abilities, not you.



If it is correct that Wal-Mart is guilty of paying below what you Liberals decide they should,.....

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?



Is that query beyond you?
Or do you fear that the correct answer would impact your Liberal creds?




Now....be honest and simply admit that it is Wal-Mart's success that you hate.

Here, let me repeat this for you. Because we as tax payers pick up the tab. It isn't a question of hating success. It is exploiting the tax payers for their success that is a real bummer.

Now, be honest........is it by the word or the entire post?

In the words of the famed Brown Bomber, "you can run, but you can't hide."


You ignored the query:

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?

 

[bedowin62]

Walmart sells products that regular people use every day at prices working people can afford.

only the petty, insidious, naive, rabidly political Left has a problem with this.

 

[Disir]

YAWN

once again you refuse to address the main point. what happens when they are laid off?
how much of their needs will be subsidized by the government then?

I have addressed your fear repeatedly.

lol; you havent even backed up your own talking points; let alone my "fear"

Main Findings:
• Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public
assistance programs in California comes
at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimat-
ed $86 million annually; this is com-
prised of $32 million in health related
expenses and $54 million in other assis-
tance.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees in
California utilize an estimated 40 per-
cent more in taxpayer-funded health
care than the average for families of all
large retail employees.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees use
an estimated 38 percent more in other
(non-health care) public assistance pro-
grams (such as food stamps, Earned
Income Tax Credit, subsidized school
lunches, and subsidized housing) than
the average for families of all large retail
employees.
• If other large California retailers adopt-
ed Wal-Mart’s wage and benefits stan-
dards, it would cost taxpayers an addi-
tional $410 million a year in public assis-
tance to employees
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/walmart.pdf

Walmart employees on food stamps: Their wages aren?t enough to get by.

Food Stamps Don't Keep Walmart's Prices Low, They Keep Its Profits High*|*Amy Traub

 

[PoliticalChic]

I have addressed your fear repeatedly.

lol; you havent even backed up your own talking points; let alone my "fear"

Main Findings:
• Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public
assistance programs in California comes
at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimat-
ed $86 million annually; this is com-
prised of $32 million in health related
expenses and $54 million in other assis-
tance.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees in
California utilize an estimated 40 per-
cent more in taxpayer-funded health
care than the average for families of all
large retail employees.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees use
an estimated 38 percent more in other
(non-health care) public assistance pro-
grams (such as food stamps, Earned
Income Tax Credit, subsidized school
lunches, and subsidized housing) than
the average for families of all large retail
employees.
• If other large California retailers adopt-
ed Wal-Mart’s wage and benefits stan-
dards, it would cost taxpayers an addi-
tional $410 million a year in public assis-
tance to employees
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/walmart.pdf

Walmart employees on food stamps: Their wages aren?t enough to get by.

Food Stamps Don't Keep Walmart's Prices Low, They Keep Its Profits High*|*Amy Traub

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?

 

[Disir]

",,,,right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart...."



I sure do....as do most American folks.



1. The diverse group of self-identified liberals are better educated than the country as a whole, less religious, more urban, less married and wealthier. They support abortion and gay rights, are unconcerned about pornography, and rarely own guns.
Edsall, “ Building Red America,” p. 18.


2. The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters, as outlined in the Pew survey of 2007, “Trends in Political Values.” One example: two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart, while a majority of professional-class Democrats consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate. Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

T he public expresses highly favorable views of many leading corporations. Johnson & Johnson and Google have the most positive images of 23 corporations tested. At the bottom of the list: Halliburton, which is viewed favorably by fewer than half of those familiar enough with the company to give it a rating.
Views of many corporations vary significantly among Democrats along class lines. Two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart compared with 45% of professional-class Democrats.
Americans are worried more that businesses rather than government are snooping into their lives. About three-in-four (74%) say they are concerned that business corporations are collecting too much personal information while 58% express the same concern about the government.
The public is losing confidence in itself. A dwindling majority (57%) say they have a good deal of confidence in the wisdom of the American people when it comes to making political decisions. Similarly, the proportion who agrees that Americans “can always find a way to solve our problems” has dropped 16 points in the past five years.
Americans feel increasingly estranged from their government. Barely a third (34%) agree with the statement, “most elected officials care what people like me think,” nearly matching the 20-year low of 33% recorded in 1994 and a 10-point drop since 2002.
Young people continue to hold a more favorable view of government than do other Americans. At the same time, young adults express the least interest in voting and other forms of political participation.
Interpersonal racial attitudes continue to moderate. More than eight-in-ten (83%) agree that “it’s all right for blacks and whites to date,” up six percentage points since 2003 and 13 points from a Pew survey conducted 10 years ago.
Republicans are increasingly divided over the cultural impact of immigrants. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) conservative Republicans say immigrants threaten American customs, compared with 43% of GOP moderates and liberals. Democrats have long been divided along ideological lines, but the GOP previously had not been.

Roadmap to the Report

Section 1, which begins on p. 7, describes the striking shift in party identification over the past five years, the public’s views of both parties, and the ideological profile of the early presidential primary states. Section 2, which details the public’s views of the government safety net, success and empowerment, and personal finances, begins on p. 12. Section 3 (p. 19) covers public attitudes toward foreign policy and national security. Section 4 (p. 30) covers opinions about religion and social issues. Section 5 (p. 39) describes changing attitudes toward race and race relations. Section 6 (p. 45) discusses the public’s complex views about government and political participation. Opinions about business, and ratings for individual corporations, are covered in Section 7, which begins on p. 52. Section 8 covers public views about civil liberties, the environment, and science.
Report Materials

Complete Report
Topline Questionnaire
1987-2007 Values Surveys (combined dataset)
2007 Values Update

Table of Contents

Summary of Findings
Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

It might be better to read the original.

Did you find that your link said other than what I posted?

You are a government school grad, aren't you.

When you cherry pick shit and then add in cutesy crap like this: consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate-then you have clearly demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. Therefore, make sure that people have access to where it originates from. I'm sure that your boss won't mind.

 

[Disir]

lol; you havent even backed up your own talking points; let alone my "fear"

Main Findings:
• Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public
assistance programs in California comes
at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimat-
ed $86 million annually; this is com-
prised of $32 million in health related
expenses and $54 million in other assis-
tance.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees in
California utilize an estimated 40 per-
cent more in taxpayer-funded health
care than the average for families of all
large retail employees.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees use
an estimated 38 percent more in other
(non-health care) public assistance pro-
grams (such as food stamps, Earned
Income Tax Credit, subsidized school
lunches, and subsidized housing) than
the average for families of all large retail
employees.
• If other large California retailers adopt-
ed Wal-Mart’s wage and benefits stan-
dards, it would cost taxpayers an addi-
tional $410 million a year in public assis-
tance to employees
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/walmart.pdf

Walmart employees on food stamps: Their wages aren?t enough to get by.

Food Stamps Don't Keep Walmart's Prices Low, They Keep Its Profits High*|*Amy Traub

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?

No, sweetie...how is this the tax payers fault?

 

[Disir]

Walmart sells products that regular people use every day at prices working people can afford.

only the petty, insidious, naive, rabidly political Left has a problem with this.

Tell me more.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

T he public expresses highly favorable views of many leading corporations. Johnson & Johnson and Google have the most positive images of 23 corporations tested. At the bottom of the list: Halliburton, which is viewed favorably by fewer than half of those familiar enough with the company to give it a rating.
Views of many corporations vary significantly among Democrats along class lines. Two-thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart compared with 45% of professional-class Democrats.
Americans are worried more that businesses rather than government are snooping into their lives. About three-in-four (74%) say they are concerned that business corporations are collecting too much personal information while 58% express the same concern about the government.
The public is losing confidence in itself. A dwindling majority (57%) say they have a good deal of confidence in the wisdom of the American people when it comes to making political decisions. Similarly, the proportion who agrees that Americans “can always find a way to solve our problems” has dropped 16 points in the past five years.
Americans feel increasingly estranged from their government. Barely a third (34%) agree with the statement, “most elected officials care what people like me think,” nearly matching the 20-year low of 33% recorded in 1994 and a 10-point drop since 2002.
Young people continue to hold a more favorable view of government than do other Americans. At the same time, young adults express the least interest in voting and other forms of political participation.
Interpersonal racial attitudes continue to moderate. More than eight-in-ten (83%) agree that “it’s all right for blacks and whites to date,” up six percentage points since 2003 and 13 points from a Pew survey conducted 10 years ago.
Republicans are increasingly divided over the cultural impact of immigrants. Nearly seven-in-ten (68%) conservative Republicans say immigrants threaten American customs, compared with 43% of GOP moderates and liberals. Democrats have long been divided along ideological lines, but the GOP previously had not been.

Roadmap to the Report

Section 1, which begins on p. 7, describes the striking shift in party identification over the past five years, the public’s views of both parties, and the ideological profile of the early presidential primary states. Section 2, which details the public’s views of the government safety net, success and empowerment, and personal finances, begins on p. 12. Section 3 (p. 19) covers public attitudes toward foreign policy and national security. Section 4 (p. 30) covers opinions about religion and social issues. Section 5 (p. 39) describes changing attitudes toward race and race relations. Section 6 (p. 45) discusses the public’s complex views about government and political participation. Opinions about business, and ratings for individual corporations, are covered in Section 7, which begins on p. 52. Section 8 covers public views about civil liberties, the environment, and science.
Report Materials

Complete Report
Topline Questionnaire
1987-2007 Values Surveys (combined dataset)
2007 Values Update

Table of Contents

Summary of Findings
Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes: 1987-2007 | Pew Research Center for the People and the Press

It might be better to read the original.

Did you find that your link said other than what I posted?

You are a government school grad, aren't you.

When you cherry pick shit and then add in cutesy crap like this: consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate-then you have clearly demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. Therefore, make sure that people have access to where it originates from. I'm sure that your boss won't mind.

Your post would only apply if what I posted was contrary to the entire piece.

Did I?

If so....show it.


Or have you lost the debate and now resort to the oh-so-Liberal default: lying.

 

[P@triot]

So your point is that these people's stupendous wealth is a boon to mankind?

So noted.

No, silly.....my point is that anyone who supports the Liberal perspective is a dunce.

And, the OP so indicates.

Two days ago the internet was flooded with articles on how the GOP intends to use privatization of education as it's platform. Now, we see a plethora of nonthinking right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart. Note that Wal-Mart employees are reliant on state aid to survive because Wal-Mart refuses to pay them. We subsidize them. Understand?

Yet, you think they are totally awesome because they drop lot o' cash in this industry.

You call this success. You, obviously, have not thought this through.

And why doesn't WalMart pay their employees better? Because you liberals insist on taxing them to death so that you can continue to dole out cash & prizes to the masses in exchange for their votes. In short, you do everyone you can to keep WalMart employees on the government plantation - where you need them to be.

And then you cry about it once you achieve your goal...

 

[PoliticalChic]

Main Findings:
• Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public
assistance programs in California comes
at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimat-
ed $86 million annually; this is com-
prised of $32 million in health related
expenses and $54 million in other assis-
tance.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees in
California utilize an estimated 40 per-
cent more in taxpayer-funded health
care than the average for families of all
large retail employees.
• The families of Wal-Mart employees use
an estimated 38 percent more in other
(non-health care) public assistance pro-
grams (such as food stamps, Earned
Income Tax Credit, subsidized school
lunches, and subsidized housing) than
the average for families of all large retail
employees.
• If other large California retailers adopt-
ed Wal-Mart’s wage and benefits stan-
dards, it would cost taxpayers an addi-
tional $410 million a year in public assis-
tance to employees
http://laborcenter.berkeley.edu/retail/walmart.pdf

Walmart employees on food stamps: Their wages aren?t enough to get by.

Food Stamps Don't Keep Walmart's Prices Low, They Keep Its Profits High*|*Amy Traub

...how is that a fault for Wal-Mart, and not the prerogative of those who applied for the positions?

No, sweetie...how is this the tax payers fault?

So....you cannot find that Wal-Mart forced any of said individuals to work for them.....

....and you would therefore decline allowing the employees freedom of choice.

Very Liberal of you.


And, actually.....Wal-Mart pays very well.





Let's consider the following: those employees who do apply for welfare benefits are doing so not because the wages from Wal-Mart are too low.....

...but because Liberal welfare policies encourage taking of taxpayer largesse....whether they need it or not.


As follows:

" In fact, since
President Obama took office, federal welfare
spending has increased by 41 percent, more
than $193 billion per year. ....
….the dramatically larger increase also suggests that part
of the program’s growth is due to conscious
policy choices by this administration to ease
eligibility rules and expand caseloads….income limits for eligibility have
risen twice as fast as inflation since 2007
and are now roughly 10 percent higher than
they were when Obama took office. Casey Mulligan, “The Sharp Increase in
the Food Stamps Program,” Economix,
http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/11/16/the-sharp-increase-in-the-food-stamps-program/
Study: More Than Half a Trillion Dollars Spent on Welfare But Poverty Levels Unaffected | CNS News



Liberals practially demand that folks take welfare benefits!

 

[Disir]

Did you find that your link said other than what I posted?

You are a government school grad, aren't you.

When you cherry pick shit and then add in cutesy crap like this: consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate-then you have clearly demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. Therefore, make sure that people have access to where it originates from. I'm sure that your boss won't mind.

Your post would only apply if what I posted was contrary to the entire piece.

Did I?

If so....show it.


Or have you lost the debate and now resort to the oh-so-Liberal default: lying.

Where is this:The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters,

http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/312.pdf

 

[Disir]

No, silly.....my point is that anyone who supports the Liberal perspective is a dunce.

And, the OP so indicates.

Two days ago the internet was flooded with articles on how the GOP intends to use privatization of education as it's platform. Now, we see a plethora of nonthinking right wing posts that are in support of Wal-Mart. Note that Wal-Mart employees are reliant on state aid to survive because Wal-Mart refuses to pay them. We subsidize them. Understand?

Yet, you think they are totally awesome because they drop lot o' cash in this industry.

You call this success. You, obviously, have not thought this through.

And why doesn't WalMart pay their employees better? Because you liberals insist on taxing them to death so that you can continue to dole out cash & prizes to the masses in exchange for their votes. In short, you do everyone you can to keep WalMart employees on the government plantation - where you need them to be.

And then you cry about it once you achieve your goal...

That's a lie. Why are you lying?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Just how far, to what lengths....of should I ask, to what depths will Liberals sink in their efforts to attack 'success'?

Here....to set the stage, the explanation for the Left's hatred of capitalism and the free market, e.g., Wal-Mart: it is a system which produces winners and losers, a painful fact that the Left would rather not see.





Add the current debate over charter schools and vouchers, clearly more successful than public schools....and you have the explanation for the following:



1. ".... this past weekend’s front-page news article in the New York Times... about the Walton Family Foundation and what the Times called “its many tentacles.”.

2. ... the article goes on to explain that the foundation, backed by members of the family that founded Walmart, “has helped fuel some of the fastest growing, and most divisive, trends in public education — including teacher evaluations based on student test scores and publicly funded vouchers for students to attend private schools.”

3. The article reports, for example, that “Walton’s Mr. Sternberg, who started his career in Teach for America and founded the Bronx Lab School, a public school in New York City, does not apologize for Walton’s commitment to charter schools and vouchers.”

4. Why would he apologize? Why should he be expected to apologize? He’s helping to make schools better. .... If anyone should apologize here, it is the Times, for suggesting that an apology is in order.




5. .... in this case it taps in to a broader and highly significant political trend, which is the tendency by the left to blame spending by right-of-center or free-market-oriented billionaires for just about every twist and turn in the public policy debate.

6. ... Charles and David Koch are imagined as puppeteers behind the Tea Party or the Keystone pipeline, or Sheldon Adelson is the reason for pro-Israel sentiment in the Republican Party.
Never mind that there are left-wing billionaires like George Soros or Thomas Steyer, not to mention labor unions, spending large sums,...




7. If parents were perfectly satisfied with regular public schools, the charter and voucher movements would face a tougher battle than they already do...haven’t made school vouchers widely available other than in a few unusual and narrow cases of a failing school, a poor family or special-needs student, and a rare state or local government that has managed to pass a voucher law over teachers’ union opposition.





8. For a sense of what a non-Walton public school is like, one need look no further than P.S. 111, the Adolph S. Ochs School in Manhattan. It is a taxpayer funded New York City public school named after the patriarch of the family that controls the New York Times. Over the years the New York Times Company and its foundation have been involved with the school .... suggesting a certain hypocrisy of the Times in objecting to the Walton family’s efforts.

9. The Times’ tentacles on the Adolph Ochs school may not have been “divisive,” but neither have they been particularly successful; the school earned a grade of “D” for its school environment in its most recent evaluation from the city, and the city’s quality reviewobserves “the principal acknowledges that teachers have not received written feedback this year.”

a. Only 19% of the school’s sixth graders pass the state English test and only 24% of the school’s fifth graders pass the state math test.




10. If the Walton Foundation can provide a voucher or charter school option to escape this status quo, perhaps the Times should thank the Waltons rather than imply that an apology is in order."
Waltons Derided by N.Y. Times As Its Own School Charity Fails - The New York Sun





As Winston Churchill observed:
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”

For the Liberal NYTimes, the equal sharing of non-education is a virtue.

Walmart is giving children a choice apart and a change to get free from the Democrat Intellectual pedophilia Institutions known as "Public Schools"

It's absolutely fucking ghoulish that Dems are allowed to get away with this for generations

 

[The T]

Just how far, to what lengths....of should I ask, to what depths will Liberals sink in their efforts to attack 'success'?

Here....to set the stage, the explanation for the Left's hatred of capitalism and the free market, e.g., Wal-Mart: it is a system which produces winners and losers, a painful fact that the Left would rather not see.





Add the current debate over charter schools and vouchers, clearly more successful than public schools....and you have the explanation for the following:



1. ".... this past weekend’s front-page news article in the New York Times... about the Walton Family Foundation and what the Times called “its many tentacles.”.

2. ... the article goes on to explain that the foundation, backed by members of the family that founded Walmart, “has helped fuel some of the fastest growing, and most divisive, trends in public education — including teacher evaluations based on student test scores and publicly funded vouchers for students to attend private schools.”

3. The article reports, for example, that “Walton’s Mr. Sternberg, who started his career in Teach for America and founded the Bronx Lab School, a public school in New York City, does not apologize for Walton’s commitment to charter schools and vouchers.”

4. Why would he apologize? Why should he be expected to apologize? He’s helping to make schools better. .... If anyone should apologize here, it is the Times, for suggesting that an apology is in order.




5. .... in this case it taps in to a broader and highly significant political trend, which is the tendency by the left to blame spending by right-of-center or free-market-oriented billionaires for just about every twist and turn in the public policy debate.

6. ... Charles and David Koch are imagined as puppeteers behind the Tea Party or the Keystone pipeline, or Sheldon Adelson is the reason for pro-Israel sentiment in the Republican Party.
Never mind that there are left-wing billionaires like George Soros or Thomas Steyer, not to mention labor unions, spending large sums,...




7. If parents were perfectly satisfied with regular public schools, the charter and voucher movements would face a tougher battle than they already do...haven’t made school vouchers widely available other than in a few unusual and narrow cases of a failing school, a poor family or special-needs student, and a rare state or local government that has managed to pass a voucher law over teachers’ union opposition.





8. For a sense of what a non-Walton public school is like, one need look no further than P.S. 111, the Adolph S. Ochs School in Manhattan. It is a taxpayer funded New York City public school named after the patriarch of the family that controls the New York Times. Over the years the New York Times Company and its foundation have been involved with the school .... suggesting a certain hypocrisy of the Times in objecting to the Walton family’s efforts.

9. The Times’ tentacles on the Adolph Ochs school may not have been “divisive,” but neither have they been particularly successful; the school earned a grade of “D” for its school environment in its most recent evaluation from the city, and the city’s quality reviewobserves “the principal acknowledges that teachers have not received written feedback this year.”

a. Only 19% of the school’s sixth graders pass the state English test and only 24% of the school’s fifth graders pass the state math test.




10. If the Walton Foundation can provide a voucher or charter school option to escape this status quo, perhaps the Times should thank the Waltons rather than imply that an apology is in order."
Waltons Derided by N.Y. Times As Its Own School Charity Fails - The New York Sun





As Winston Churchill observed:
“The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”

For the Liberal NYTimes, the equal sharing of non-education is a virtue.

Walmart is giving children a choice apart and a change to get free from the Democrat Intellectual pedophilia Institutions known as "Public Schools"

It's absolutely fucking ghoulish that Dems are allowed to get away with this for generations

Add "Common Core" to that threat.

 

[TemplarKormac]

No. It stands. Otherwise, the employees would not be using state aid. So, we can cut the pretense of how cool they are. There is something very, very wrong with Wal-Mart dropping this amount of cash and yet, tax payers have to pay for what Wal-Mart refuses to do.

No. Your argument is invalid. You simply cite a NYT article and insist that it can't be refuted. You can't win an argument with sheer willpower. You win them with objectivity.

So, what am I reading, first it's wrong for Walmart to fund their employees' education, but now you're saying they need state aid? And you forget one critical thing:

Its their money.

It's wrong for Wal-Mart to drop cash into charter schools and to influence the education system when they refuse to pay their workers enough to survive without state aid. Period. This information has been out for a very long time.

Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to sit there and admonish Wal-Mart for funding charter schools, when you say nothing of the Federal Government dropping cash into Public Schools?

What is wrong with this picture?

 

[Disir]

No. Your argument is invalid. You simply cite a NYT article and insist that it can't be refuted. You can't win an argument with sheer willpower. You win them with objectivity.

So, what am I reading, first it's wrong for Walmart to fund their employees' education, but now you're saying they need state aid? And you forget one critical thing:

Its their money.

It's wrong for Wal-Mart to drop cash into charter schools and to influence the education system when they refuse to pay their workers enough to survive without state aid. Period. This information has been out for a very long time.

Don't you think it's a bit hypocritical to sit there and admonish Wal-Mart for funding charter schools, when you say nothing of the Federal Government dropping cash into Public Schools?

What is wrong with this picture?

Nope. Why would I do that?

 

[PoliticalChic]

When you cherry pick shit and then add in cutesy crap like this: consider it to be something akin to evil incarnate-then you have clearly demonstrated that you cannot be trusted. Therefore, make sure that people have access to where it originates from. I'm sure that your boss won't mind.

Your post would only apply if what I posted was contrary to the entire piece.

Did I?

If so....show it.


Or have you lost the debate and now resort to the oh-so-Liberal default: lying.

Where is this:The group frequently finds themselves in disagreement with white, working-class voters,

http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/312.pdf

"Views of many corporations vary significantly among Democrats along class lines. Two thirds of working-class Democrats have a favorable view of Wal-Mart compared with 45% of professional-class Democrats."
http://www.people-press.org/files/legacy-pdf/312.pdf




So....when can I expect your apology?