Recent content by Red Green

I totally agree, but with the govt underwriting in place, the lenders won't care about default so you accomplish only to ease the burden on students and place it on taxpayers.

They pretty much are: the loans are given with govt underwriting, which means the govt (you and I) are co-signers. So let's say this dumb bitch runs up student loans of $80,000 getting her master's degree in Women and Multicultural studies. Now, she decides to try and get a job and ends up...

I believe the non-discharge clause comes from the fact that a lot of student loans are govt (i.e. you and me) backed. Drop the non-discharge rule, sure, but you really need to drop the govt underwriting first.

ARE YOU KIDDING! She will be highly sought after by many employers who go by 3 letter acronyms like HHS, HUD, EPA, etc! This dumb bitch is going to make me look like a pauper over her lifetime!

I am providing the "logical" answer to the 1% leaving. As the air-head chick noted "there will always be a 1%", which is true. If you have all the really wealthy flee the country, you can just replace each one with 100 poor illegals and to help provide free college for her dumb ass. Mind you...

We can just replace them with 100% illiterate illegal aliens. And give them free college. Because that's being a good person.

This chick should be waiting tables. Or dancing on them. Actually, no that would not work. Maybe she should be taking orders at McD's. Anyway, she's too stupid to be going to college.

"Disgraced" the badge!? Are you fucking kidding me? This guy is the poster child for the badge, I mean, other than he got caught....

That's my thoughts exactly. They will only want to keep that 2 party monopoly as long as it serves "them". If the two party monopoly is somehow shattered by having one party go rogue, then the third party participation will be the "divide and conquer" strategy to keep the low-information...

Actually, that was almost verbatim the law in AZ regarding the justification of the use of lethal force, at least for us mundanes. I have taken concealed carry courses here a couple of times. No, you do not need to wait until someone shoots someone, you just need a 'reasonable fear' of...

It is if there is a reasonable suspicion that the suspect will commit acts leading to grievous bodily injury or imminent death to another individual. Any reasonable person would probably conclude that this guy fell into that category. First off, you are really reaching here. There are a...

That's a stupid comparison. If someone commits a few strong-armed robberies, and armed robberies and threatens people with a weapon just before firing it off in the air, then yeah. The guy is on a violent crime spree, appears to be unstable and is armed with a loaded 30-30. Are you going to...

The guy had already committed an armed robbery, discharged the weapon, threatened other people, etc. I think any question over whether the fellow was dangerous had been removed at that point. Having a shoot-out in a neighborhood, especially with that kind of rifle, would be very dangerous to...

If I understand the backstory to this, I actually don't think the cop acted irrationally at this point. For once, I actually agree with the level of force applied. The guy with the rifle didn't die and as far as I understand was not critically wounded either.

I don't think that's the reason. The fact is that a pig executing a mundane in plain view is 'dog bites man' at this point. I used to get all worked up about this stuff but at this point, it's like the weather report; oh gee, sunshine again today! Let me do a handspring! The only thing that...