It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Jeb Bush In 1995: Unwed Mothers Should Be Publicly Shamed

page: 7
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:23 PM
link   
That was then, this is now.
What difference does it make?

Shall we go back and listen to what Hillary thought about The Mark of Cain,
and her thoughts on White Supremacy?






edit on 10-6-2015 by burntheships because: (no reason given)




posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:26 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer



The Bill of Rights, Constitution will become meaningless with a tidal wave of entitlement-thought.


Come on, now, Beez... I am certain that you must recognize that the Constitution has many enemies beyond that.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: beezzer



The Bill of Rights, Constitution will become meaningless with a tidal wave of entitlement-thought.



Come on, now, Beez... I am certain that you must recognize that the Constitution has many enemies beyond that.



Sadly, many of the enemies are current residents.
edit on 10-6-2015 by beezzer because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: beezzer

originally posted by: angeldoll
It's amazing to me that anyone would support "public shaming" of any sort. It attempts to 'humiliate', and anybody who wishes to humiliate a woman who is pregnant -- just ain't much to 'em in my book.


You never argue?

You never debate?

You're always respectful and mindful of your opponents needs and wants and desires?

Golly.

I'm not as awesome as you are.

*humbly grovels*


No I never do anything untoward. I am perfect, but please resume your seated position. Although perfect, I'm unworthy of humble groveling.

~You didn't comment on anything I said. This is in fact an attempt to bully and humiliate, and deliberating humiliating someone is abusive, right? Doesn't matter what kind of shaming, shaming of any flavor is abusive. It's the wrong path. I don't want someone with this mentality leading our country. Do you really? What if he goes after smokers? Or plumpness next? Where does that leave you? What if goes after the totally awesome? Where does that leave me?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   
a reply to: angeldoll

Obama never shamed?

Obama hasn't been divisive?

'Bout the only people I can think of that aren't divisive are Gandhi and Jesus and Buddha.

And they ain't members of ATS nor are they running for office.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
What if he goes after smokers? Or plumpness next? Where does that leave you? What if goes after the totally awesome? Where does that leave me?




lolz

That's funny.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:43 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer
But are we talking about Obama? Or are we discussing a man who wants to be President of this country, thinking it's acceptable to humiliate unmarried women who are pregnant?



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:44 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer





Sadly, many of the enemies are current residents.



And that is precisely why we need to give the credit, where it is due.

It's not single mothers, deadbeat fathers, welfare recipients, or the poor, that are the problem.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: angeldoll
a reply to: beezzer
But are we talking about Obama? Or are we discussing a man who wants to be President of this country, thinking it's acceptable to humiliate unmarried women who are pregnant?


Jeb is just Hillary with testosterone.

A waste of time in a 500 dollar suit.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: daryllyn
a reply to: beezzer





Sadly, many of the enemies are current residents.



And that is precisely why we need to give the credit, where it is due.

It's not single mothers, deadbeat fathers, welfare recipients, or the poor, that are the problem.



They certainly aren't the solution.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:54 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


A waste of time in a 500 dollar suit.


I bet his neckties cost that. : )

He might very well be 'the candidate", and if so I bet he does some back-tracking on these comments. But... they all have messes to clean up going in...... all of them. I don't like any of them, but I never do. They are all bought and paid for anyway. Sigh. Meet the new boss same as the old boss.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:56 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc


There are exactly the same and, if you paid attention in psych 101 (which I really don't believe you did at this point) the mechanism is exactly the same

No - they are not the same.

Positive reinforcement is acknowledging what a person has done right and done well. The converse is ignoring.

NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT (public humiliation or shaming) does no good at all, except destroy the person's self esteem.

And I not only "passed" Psych 101, but went on to Psych 600-level. And graduated with honors.
Darillyn is RIGHT.

Your military background is showing. It's a shame that you were put through that nonsense, Doc. It really is.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 09:59 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

That is some BS and you know it. The very few that maliciously abuse are NOT part of what is wrong with the US and certainly not responsible for the growing inequality of wealth that is happening in the US.

It is simply an established fall back position that you are taking here, that is trying to place the blame on the non-working poor. The working poor often get hoodwinked by this argument and the blame is easily shifted from where it belongs.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs

Your military background is showing. It's a shame that you were put through that nonsense, Doc. It really is.


lolz

More shaming.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:01 PM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc


in our current warfare state,

Dear Doc,
hey -- did you mean to type 'welfare'?

Because if not.... well, yeah - I don't want our 'current warfare state'. Not the aggression, or the shaming, or the violence, or any of it. Please take your 'curent warfare state' and tuck it away somewhere out of sight in the archives room where it can gather dust and mold.


Thanks.
Love, Buzzy



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:03 PM
link   


Actually, not a bad idea. But to make it work, this should be extended


Yes, extended to families that funded the Nazis, killed thousands of Iraqis and American soldiers, and destroyed the constitution like Jeb's.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:04 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


More shaming.

Don't even start with me, beez, please. You don't think 'basic training' "shamed" you into submission? You think you came out of it unscarred??

Pleez, beez. The military WRECKS people's souls. I live with the product of 'basic training' on a sensitive soul every bloody day.

War is hell.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer

neither is griping and complaining about them, shaming them!!
why don't we ever read about the married couples out there that are on these benefit programs? I've known many throughout my lifetime, in various occupations. but nope whenever there's a thread about the programs we hear about the single moms, the lazies, the one's who just didn't work hard enough!
never hear anyone else tell a story about the family that had to break up because the baby was born with severe medical problems that wouldn't get the care it needed any other way, or how the social service system would encourage couples to break up in such circumstances because it was the only way they could get the gov't to help.
nope, it's all just a bunch of lazy single moms, who need training or a husband or whatever. they just don't know what responsibility is and they are unwilling to accept it!
well sorry to say but the businesses and the corporations also have a responsibility in this society also and it extends much farther than just pulling off higher and higher profits every year. and the gov't has far more responsibility than just ensuring that a few at the top get to maintain and grow their wealth year after year, even when their mistakes tank the worldwide economy and send the masses to those gov't programs.
That mother with the baby had only two choices...either the family split up so she could go on the welfare, or the baby would be taken away and put in a foster home so it could be taken care of....some choices huh? The father had a decent job, he was a slacker.
you could have griped at them till the cows came home and still wouldn't get them to regret the decision that they made..
because well...they made the right choice!
or you could gripe at the gov't, or the crappy healthcare system that we have, who had the power and still do, to change the way things work in this country.
but then some poor multi-billion dollar companies might just lose some of their precious profits and we can't have that now can we??



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs

Basic training didn't scar me.

Not even close.



posted on Jun, 10 2015 @ 10:07 PM
link   
a reply to: beezzer


Basic training didn't scar me.

Not even close.

Then you must have been insensitive to begin with. Or raised in an authoritarian household where you were shamed and ridiculed and became inured to it.

That makes sense.
Carry on, then......

edit on 6/10/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join