The growing list of ideas and principles that the left now sees as "right wing" is pretty remarkable -- Free speech - 'Far-right' Individualism - 'Far-right' Free markets - 'Far-right' Free press - 'Far-right' Freedom of association - 'Far-right' Equality of opportunity - 'Far-right' Equality before the law - 'Far-right' Times have changed
Teaching kids to be competitive? In the last 20-30 years, we've been moving away from that. If anything we've been stomping on it (especially from boys) and handing out participation trophies. We're a far more wussified culture because of it, and yet we get more school shootings. Competitiveness isn't why we get school shootings. Screwed up families (especially selfish, checked out pansy fathers) are why we get school shootings.
The irony is that he points out all the symptoms that seem to come from kids that grow up in disjointed, fragmented families, with no sense of purpose due in part to the disappearance of religion from our culture, along with the disconnected sense of self that comes from raising our kids on TV/smart phones. And that... apparently... is the fault of conservatives and capitalists - which BTW have been in place a lot longer than these recent trends have been around. It's funny to think that he's blaming capitalism when we've never been more anti-capitalist in our thinking and in the way we approach education. The left runs the schools, sets the agendas and curriculum, and silences any dissenters, and yet it's still the fault of conservatives that kids aren't being properly educated.
To me, the big question is why the Right tolerates this and has for decades. As a political movement, the Right is strategically pretty stupid.
Was listening to Andrew Klavan and Michael Knowles talk about something along this lines - more about why the left seems to be a lot more hostile and aggressive in its approach to discussions on culture. The point that came up was that conservatives by nature are going to be less aggressive because they tend to be more laissez faire. To the extent that it's not impacting them or their families, they're not generally out trying to legislate people's thoughts and preferences. (Yes, there are exceptions.) Liberal/progressive ideas are now mainstream in academia, and conservatives haven't shifted their approach. They don't want to be confrontational (I'm not talking about the personalities or advocates, I'm talking about the rank and file conservative) so when weird ideas pop up in school, they have a tendency to deal with it in terms of their immediate family, but they don't see it as a movement to be stopped or started. Their instinct isn't to organize and push back, it's to basically go along until it becomes a crisis. Ultimately I think we've been in denial for a long time, and those of us who see progressive culture as a threat to Christianity, morality, western culture in general have always been kind of shushed by the mainstream GOP as overreacting. They just don't believe that progressives really are that crazy, and they underestimate how committed they are to changing the structure of our society as a whole. Culturally, progressives have been winning minor skirmishes since the '60s, and most conservatives just let it go because it's easier not to fight over "little stuff." It's why progressives ultimately win these battles - any compromise is a win for them, and moves them closer to where they want to be. And once that compromise takes place, there's no going back. You can never take that inch back from them, and they will never compromise without coming back a year later to have the very same battle and win another inch.
Maybe it's the area I live it but physical competitiveness has been diminished but academic competitiveness has been placed on a solid series of steroids.
I would call it an excessive focus on credentialism before calling it academic competitiveness. It was competitive when I was in school, just less crap to worry about.
Values have changed across cultures throughout time. Despite the assine beliefs that “the moral arc of the universe bends towards justice”, that we are progressing to something liberal culturally and will never go back or that there is a wrong side of history, history shows that values, culture and even history itself is a pendulum swinging back and forth. Remember, societal and technological progress went backwards from the Romans to the dark ages. Russia has gone from czarist, to communist, to democratic to semi-democratic. Tomorrow we could be an ultra left socialist society. The day after we could be a ultra right monarchy. Never believe for second that culture, society and government cannot switch backwards, sideways, a new direction, etc. Rome went from kings, to a republic, to a dictator then back to kings (and a Pope). Another example, 200 years ago, did anyone believe Israel would exist again? Palestine has gone from the actual original soddomites, to jews, to chrisrians, to muslims to a mix and many others in between. Just 100 years ago the world was mostly ruled by empires. The future is unknown. However, if conservatives continue to roll over, especially with schools, then their numbers will dwindle in the immediate future.
More of those 'unintended consequences' from the incredibly stupid notion of permitting people to assert they are some other 'gender' and Courts signing off on it. https://atlanta.cbslocal.com/2018/07/30/man-changes-gender-car-insurance/ Dude readily admits he did so to scam the insurance people. However, the legal fiction would ALSO permit him unfettered access to female safe spaces. And yet people still want to insist there is no harm in molly-coddling the left and their claim that people can be whatever they want to be...
I await men in dresses taking over womens NCAA sports How would you like to be the judge who has to rule on that lawsuit?
So NBA player Blake Griffin was involved in a child support case in Los Angeles. He was ordered to pay $258,000 a month to his ex ($3,096,000 a year) Ouch. That better be one special child. By way of contrast, all-star Isaiah Thomas will make $2,029,463 for the entire upcoming season.
Screw him. I have no problem with this. Why should a kid's lifestyle suffer because his selfish parents split up? I think it should be expensive and a pain in the *** to ditch your kids.
Agree but I'd add that the support should be tied to his current contracts + endorsements. When he retires the support should drop proportionally based on his current income at that time. Dad's need to learn that your children are a responsibility.
How much child support is enough for you? Everyone has an upper limit. What is yours? Mine is that she should be able to comfortably raise 15 kids on a quarter million dollars per month. I will always remember the Barry Bonds divorce playing out in the local media when I lived in SF. She was in court asking for more (I think 2X), and the judge actually asked, "Ms. Bonds, have you ever considered getting a job?"
NY Police have released video of "man" they are looking fior who attacked another man on a bus for "being white"
You're just saying that because he's from Oklahoma... Seriously though, while I agree with this sentiment, I don't believe that child support should be punitive, and this clearly is. If we're going to accept broken homes and weekend dads in this society, I'm not sure that it makes sense to say "we're going to confiscate massive amounts of money from you as a result and give it to your spouse who will in no way, shape or form actually need that much to raise the child. I could see paying for lifestyle to a degree, but what they hit him with seems egregious.
A real Dad does not need a court order to provide child support. The problem is the courts turn child support into extra income for the divorced spouse.
Looks like JLo just gave up trying to get her jeans over her gigantic rear and decided to just walk on
What you and Joe Fan are missing is that child support isn't supposed to just be enough to raise a child. It's supposed to be enough to give the child a similar lifestyle to what he or she would have had if Dad hadn't walked away. It's not punitive. The punitive element comes in when the court divides the community assets and really gets punitive if the other spouse can successfully bring a tort action. For example, if the husband beat up the wife and she sues him for assault, he could get clobbered.
For $250k per month, you could have 10 kids -- house, feed and private school them all, with each having his/her own ex-Mossad agent for personal security. And this woman might be after this set-up. She seems to be working her way through some type of professional athlete Rolodex. There was a great episode of Ray Donovan that included one of these types -- you will remember it if you saw it.
For those who say a father has responsibility to his kids. Of course he does We do not know what kind of father he has been. has he been involved in the child's life? That is a separate issue from him not wanting to pay 3 mil in support.
