• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

General political chat

aw14

Well-Known Member
Advertisement
I believe it was Gomer who already addressed this point very eloquently about a week ago.
I must have missed it. Sadly I will say she is isolating herself from congressional dems with her silly posts.

She isnt helping Perez either.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
A bit off topic but there was an interesting discussion yesterday in McAllen between Trump and Section Chief Ortiz. Ortiz said yesterday (Wednesday) in his sector they apprehended app 450 individuals at the border.

That was alarming enough but then he went on to say 133 were individuals not from Mexico or Central America. (India, Pakistan, China , etc were the countries mentioned.)

But this is a manufactured crisis according to democrats and the press.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
The founders and many of big wigs in Facebook knew that Facebook could be destructive, especially to kids and went forward anyway.

Many of the big tech people at Google etc. it is said severely limit the use of technology by their own kids. Even want them in schools that do not rely on computers that much

I have no way to verify this info but is it is true they should step forward and issue warnings for their products and platforms. Is this like Big Tobacco all over again. I hope not but if they have information that needs to be shared with parents I ho;e they step up.
There’s actually been articles about this. The advocacy group fighting against 1:1 devices in school has brought articles like this to our school board:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwi62c2B9ObfAhVOneAKHWwsBFQQzPwBegQIARAD&url=https://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-parents-raising-their-kids-tech-free-red-flag-2018-2&psig=AOvVaw3kDgRo-2HisxOTAAkNtOpU&ust=1547336560603601
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Do most Democrats consider her the face of the party? I haven’t seen much support for her among the left-leaning posters here.
That's my entire point. The media (both social and mainstream) has labeled her as such. She is everywhere. Articles are written about her every day. You open up Facebook and there is story after story, people sharing tweet after tweet.

It doesn't matter what they consider her, the evidence is in the math. She is the most talked about Democrat, by far. She is a household name and hasn't even been on the job a week yet, with no previous accomplishments nor experience.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Yeah definitely not someone I consider the face of the party.
She may not be your preference for the face, but can you deny that she indeed is, by far, the most talked about Democrat in the nation?

That is why she is further fracturing the party. Because, like you, I don't believe many, or even most, believe in her politically or want to be represented by her - but here she is, how many 1st time congress people get a longform 20/20 interview to talk about their vision for the nation their first week on the job?

She is the face of the anti-Trump movement in the media, which has made her a central figure in spite of the fact that she has very little support for her politics.
 

Jim S

Well-Known Member
That's my entire point. The media (both social and mainstream) has labeled her as such. She is everywhere. Articles are written about her every day. You open up Facebook and there is story after story, people sharing tweet after tweet.

It doesn't matter what they consider her, the evidence is in the math. She is the most talked about Democrat, by far. She is a household name and hasn't even been on the job a week yet, with no previous accomplishments nor experience.

She parrots the socialist agenda she was fed in college very well. Her green initiative has been a disaster for Spain, has badly hurt the middle class in Germany, and is a big factor in the malaise in the EU. Does she even know?

Does she ever get outside her bubble that she was fed in college? It doesn't sound like it. People that are ignorant and uninformed and don't even know they are ignorant and uniformed are dangerous.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
as a parent, this is one of the main reasons DD is not getting a smartphone until likely her late teens. Like when she can drive.

My nephew is 12 and his parents refuse to get him a smartphone too. There is a growing section of my generation - those of us that are the transition group between analog and digital age..we remember pre computer era, yet still grew up with computers - who feel similarly. School district here is trying to move to 1-1 device:student ratio in school, and there’s a large, vocal advocacy group against it gaining ground.
Yeah the 5th graders here all got one (the ones in our neighborhood). So many elementary kids have one that the school sent out an email to “teach” parents how to monitor their use. I’m flabbergasted by it. We already told our kids maybe when they are 16. But it’s gonna be a Cricket or whatever that flips open and only has 4 buttons. 1 will call me, 1 my wife, 1 911, and another 911.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
I’m going to be the odd one out on the cell phone. I think 11 is an appropriate age. Not before, but I think waiting til 16 is too long.

When I was a kid there was a pay phone almost anywhere you looked when out.. that’s not so anymore.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
I’m thankful everyday that I didn’t have to go through school in this age. It was enough to deal with the usual high school drama but once that bell rang, you could leave most of it behind. Now, it’s literally constant.

My 80 year old father, I know I bring him up a lot here, and I went out to dinner the other day. We were discussing this very topic. He said that the brilliance of social media is the sound byte style. There’s no way to misinterpret, really, because there’s not enough room to do so. The message is out, unfiltered. No middle-man. No editor. No review process. No context. And that’s why so many people take these short statements as the gospel truth, he said. “In his day,” ohhh, Dad... , “you’d want people to move past the headlines. Today, tweets are the headlines. There’s nothing to move past.” Now, he didn’t mean to apply that to everyone, but he said the damn thing keeps working.
The problem there is the headlines very often don’t match the articles.
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
Writing it as a hashtag doesn't make it true. Obama and the media had no issues calling it a crisis in 2014. The issues outlined today are no different.


And hurt millions at the same time. Myself included.


Border Portal, DHS, angel moms, and millions of people disagree. And many on the left prior to Trump. And the proposal on the table today is NOT just for a wall. It is for 200 to 300 miles of additional barriers/wall/fencing and a bunch of other items that you yawned at the other day, but that the Dems have called for. You mentioned previously your concern for how people were being treated at the border. Well there is money in there for better facilities, including for keeping families together. You yawned at that too.
If it’s a crisis worthy of “emergency” response, you don’t get time to play politics. You act immediately because you have no choice.

An earthquake is an emergency. There is no emergency at the border. The greatest liar saying there is does not make it so, no matter how many sheeple follow.

You stay hysterical. I’ll resume yawning now.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
She may not be your preference for the face, but can you deny that she indeed is, by far, the most talked about Democrat in the nation?

That is why she is further fracturing the party. Because, like you, I don't believe many, or even most, believe in her politically or want to be represented by her - but here she is, how many 1st time congress people get a longform 20/20 interview to talk about their vision for the nation their first week on the job?

She is the face of the anti-Trump movement in the media, which has made her a central figure in spite of the fact that she has very little support for her politics.
I completely agree with you, including agreeing re: the fracturing of the party.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
Yeah the 5th graders here all got one (the ones in our neighborhood). So many elementary kids have one that the school sent out an email to “teach” parents how to monitor their use. I’m flabbergasted by it. We already told our kids maybe when they are 16. But it’s gonna be a Cricket or whatever that flips open and only has 4 buttons. 1 will call me, 1 my wife, 1 911, and another 911.
Same here. (To the bolded).
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
I’m going to be the odd one out on the cell phone. I think 11 is an appropriate age. Not before, but I think waiting til 16 is too long.

When I was a kid there was a pay phone almost anywhere you looked when out.. that’s not so anymore.
My nephew is not ready to have a cell phone. I wholeheartedly agree with his parents on that. He doesn’t need one. He doesn’t go anywhere where he doesn’t have access to a phone - either by nature of the fact that one of his parents is with him (hockey, church) , or the venue has one (school). If he’s not doing those things, he is with his friends in the neighborhood within walking distance of the house (and all of the houses of his friends, who all have phones).

I see the damage phones do in schools, even as a sub. It’s not worth it. 11 would still be elementary school here (6th grade). Not going to happen.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
My nephew is not ready to have a cell phone. I wholeheartedly agree with his parents on that. He doesn’t need one. He doesn’t go anywhere where he doesn’t have access to a phone - either by nature of the fact that one of his parents is with him (hockey, church) , or the venue has one (school). If he’s not doing those things, he is with his friends in the neighborhood within walking distance of the house (and all of the houses of his friends, who all have phones).

I see the damage phones do in schools, even as a sub. It’s not worth it. 11 would still be elementary school here (6th grade). Not going to happen.
My son is 8, 3rd grade. Asks for a phone now and is repeatedly told it won’t happen.

I tell him that is he’s responsible and keeps good grades, he’ll get one in 6th grade (age 11). That’s the age when I started doing a lot more without my parents... amusement parks, our swim club, basketball tournaments etc. I remember always having a pay phone to call my parents to pick me up. Yeah, adults have cell phones and he could easily ask to use one, but I’d feel more comfortable with his own.
I can’t even stay at all of his practices now.. some coaches don’t allow it. With soccer I could sit in my car on some days, and do.. but many times he gets dropped off and I pick him up 2 hours later. The amount of parents at practices will continue to dwindle over the next few years.

All of this is completely dependent on grades and maturity level at that time.. but I don’t foresee an issue with that.

I thinks it’s definitely a case by case decision..and definitely depends on the activity/social level of the kids.


His school doesn’t allow cell phones during school hours.. I don’t have to worry about school time use.
 
Last edited:

gsam4ever

Well-Known Member

Andrew C

You know what's funny?
Premium Member
If it’s a crisis worthy of “emergency” response, you don’t get time to play politics. You act immediately because you have no choice.

An earthquake is an emergency. There is no emergency at the border. The greatest liar saying there is does not make it so, no matter how many sheeple follow.

You stay hysterical. I’ll resume yawning now.
Ok. Guess you only pretended to care about the childrens’ well being at the border then. If money going towards their well being makes you yawn.
 

21stamps

Well-Known Member
As an aside/rant regarding the cell phone convo.. maybe I didn’t notice it as a kid.. but these stupid 4pm school sport practices, and 5 pm 45minute- drive-from-home practices... drive me CRAZY. I know there are some parents who can take their kids everywhere and stay with them everywhere.. but that’s not realistic for a lot of parents. I think that has a lot to do with an increase in cell phones with kids that age.
 
Top Bottom