Posts by sideseatdriver

Attention Vendors. Please email robert@rabtech.com any instruction manuals you may have for your products. They will be added to the FILEBASE tab for members to access.

    After the 2016 polling fiasco do you think Trump gives 2 shits about polls??? He has offered a deal and the Dems just said NO. It would be stupid for him to offer more basically negotiating against himself. I think that middle America is a lot more in line with Trump than they are with Pelosi/Schumer..... time will tell all !

    He will have to compromise too and you know that. So will the Dems whether they want to or not. *shrugs* Who's going to flinch first??? We should make this a drinking game.

    with a senate that is even further right than it was before the last election I don't know how much the Democrats can do. whatever they push through the House also needs to get through the Senate and be signed by Trump


    As to Trump I don't think he has a choice. if he is seen by his base as having caved on the wall he is done - - any chance he has at a second term will be over

    If Trump goes for it, i think the Senate will follow. And concur on the base, but I'm not convinced he cares about reelection.

    The Dems have no reason to negotiate right now. The recent polling indicates the country still blames Trump for the shutdown, which means the Dems look stronger for holding out... For now. What I think the dems are missing is Trump's IDGAF attitude. They believe he will offer better terms at some point in order to affect his popularity and chances of reelection.


    Personally, I think they should have taken the deal. I think POTUS will swing left in the next election which would give dems the opportunity to find a solution in the 3 yr window provided.


    Now, if the Dems wanted to look strong, and since Trump is bent over a barrel, they would be smart to develop an amnesty package for Dreamers and current illegal immigrants and overhaul immigration towards their side. They could then give Trump his budget, and put him in a bad negotiating position to say no.


    But I'm a girl, what do I know.

    Have any slides you can post to help those in this thread that could benefit from such teachings?


    I admit I had to look up "convention of states". I agree with it's call for term limits on people in Washington.


    Though I can appreciate the idea of States having more control over Washington, those in Washington are already elected by those states. The "convention of states" seems to be along the same vein as the electoral college. With the knowledge that the majority of the countries population presides in a few states and those few states are Democrat strongholds, the "convention of states" seems like another way for Republicans to make a power grab. Looking at the bottom of their webpage and who is voicing support, should inform your students as to it's bias.

    No, the Convention of States is designed to help keep the gov't under control, hence the participation requirements and specifications on changes. This particular calling is Rep based, but the Dems could do so just as easily. Just as the electoral college is there to prevent a majority from one location from determining an election, the Convention allows states to attempt to make changes to a runaway government. Surely you can appreciate the ability to curb governmental control for either side of the aisle?


    As for bias, the people here know it and recognize it. They choose to use the information anyway (on both sides of the issue).

    Teach !!! Welcome back !! How is the teaching gig going ?? I happen to know what Convention of States means....we can’t get a consensus of who should go to what bathroom - I think it is a historical term you must be teaching :00008172::00008172:

    Ironically for this thread, I have been teaching my students bias in informational text. How to see it, what it does, and how to use it to form your own thoughts.

    Ross, I understand the meaning behind it, and I'm not recommending you change the language if it is what you need to cover your butt legally. Wherever you have humans intermingling, especially with the opportunity for anonymity (which is inherent on a web based platform), there is going to be disharmony. Who gets to make the decision with what crosses the line? I look back to some of the things that were said by people who have already joined SOG, and they are downright abusive towards other members. If you have someone like Bigdog (was that his name?) join, or even if you don't, but someone like him appears on this or another forum and your members abuse that person the way they did him, are they out of the club? Who monitors communications? Who decides what is offensive or bullying enough to be removed? Whose perception matters? If someone not in the club says something about a club member, and the response in defense of that member is abusive to the instigator, are they removed? There is way too much grey for me. There is way too much opportunity for hypocrisy and lack of transparency. (It kind of reminds me of church on a Sunday morning: you have the group of loyal followers who always try to do the right thing, you have the group of people who hope that this helps them to a better path, you have the people who just come to maintain appearances, and you have the group that come just so they can absolve themselves of their actions the rest of the week. And yes, that is a very broad brush, but it's the closest comparison I can come up with at the moment.)


    Your rules are YOUR RIGHT as a club. It's just something that I choose not to join (not that I'm an owner anyway!)


    Honestly, while I love what you are trying to do, I'm not sure I agree with the way you are going about it, so please do not change the wording of the rules on my account.

    Hey all.


    So I went to the site to join, and I was looking around at the rules required of members. You know I respect all that you guys have done, but I cannot join anything that will kick you out if you say something bad about the club or the people in it. In the grand scheme of life, I haven't known you guys that long, but I have known you well enough (or at least a few of you) to know that sometimes you need to be called out. You need to be told that what you're saying isn't right. Sometimes you have to speak out against the crowd in order to make a difference. And I have ruffled enough feathers for you all to know that I will do it. I cannot guarantee that I will not "bring disharmony" to the world that you are creating. And for those reasons I cannot and will not join. I have stood up for some of you, and I have stood against some of you, and I have watched even more of you stand on the sidelines, which is fine. I'm just not one to keep my mouth shut when the boat needs rocking.


    I wish you the best, and hope that your endeavor is successful. Just please take care to steer away from the appearance of being a bourgeoisie original owners club who comes across as being better than other members.


    Good luck! :*  

    I want to thank everyone who donated to Harvey's friend, Ed. I will be sending Harvey $700 tomorrow to help with the funeral costs, so thank you again to all who contributed. :love:


    With that said, do we want to re-open nominations for a family or individual in need? Anyone know anyone?

    Well, I have some sad news. Harvey's friend passed away today. Harvey is scrambling to get the funeral planned. I will let you know more when I know anything.


    I wanted to reach out to those who donated to ask if you would like to use your funds to offset the cost of the funeral that Harvey will likely be shouldering, or if you would like me to return your funds until we find a new individual or family to assist.