Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

School Obama's Daughters Attend Has 11 Armed Guards

page: 3
32
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Thurisaz

Originally posted by bknapple32
I went to one of those schools. Called Landon in Bethesda MD. The reason there are armed guards is because children of politicians and what not are kidnapper targets. The people of influence can be in quite a pickle if someone kidnapped their kid at school. Its really a national security issue.


Not a class issue, a national security issue


well average joe down the road with five dollar to his name, his kids are worth as much as a politicians?

WTH has money got to do with it? the very funny thing is that the majority of shopping centres and banks have guards


No one said his kids arent worth are much in terms of rights to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness. But they dont get to go to the same private schools because their dad doesnt have as much money. But it costs around 25k a year for one of those schools. Thats capitalism. I got to go to that school. I got a great education. I pursued my education further and went to graduate school Because thats what that school I went to taught me to do. And gave me tools other kids arent lucky enough to get.

But now Im average joe. I dont ask for my parents money. They did enough by sending me there. Doesnt mean I like the system. Im for universal rights. Thats education and healthcare. But theres a political party or two that wont allow that.




posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by bknapple32
 


It's all very simple.

Education is a necessity to advancement in this world which requires attendance everyday to excel. Further more a curriculum is need that raises the bar. Not the current policy of lowering the bar for statics purposes. Lot's of people will disagree with me but healthcare isn't a necessity. If the government properly did it's job privatized healthcare would be affordable for everyone. The majority of people rarely go to the doctor.

But you are right, it's a cold world. The fact still remains that a politicians kid isn't any more valuable than the local kids that live in your neighborhood.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:58 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Ah except we do not have a capitalist economy in America and haven't for nearly a century despite what propaganda your commie Idles have fed you. We have a socialist economy where the state controls the means of production and eliminates the competition for their crony corporate benefactors through bureaucracy and heavy regulation and down right force and coercion...


edit on 25-12-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 01:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Timing
 


But they are. In terms of national security they are. One terrorist kidnaps your kid or my kid, or the presidents kid... What creates more of a problem?



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:01 AM
link   
It's hilarious that people who believe in capitalism are saying "All children should be treated equally"!!!! While they continue to believe in an economic system that requires inequality to function.

Guess what, rich peoples kids will get better healthcare than yours as well. Hospitals have lavish hospital rooms for their rich guests, with nurses that will answer your every call nearly instantly. I never knew this even existed until my father got put in one.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DarKPenguiN
 


For sure, but it doesn't matter if it's socialism or capitalism life isn't ever going to be fair. At least with capitalism you can work your way up to knowing people to get those kind of favors.

It still doesn't make up for the fact that the media is gawking at the mention that all schools should have an armed guard or resource officer present in all schools even though our politicians kids go to school with armed guards.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


And theres a valet system for healthcare as well. I didnt know this until my parents offered this to me.... Basically you get a doctor and his office on retainer. You pay them something like 2 thousand a month. And you get alllllllllll the healthcare you want. You get to see a doctor when you want. No such thing as waiting in an ER. No such thing as waiting for a nurse to get through the other 9 patients next to you....

Same thing with education. I got lower class sizes, better books, FAR better teachers, better athletic facilities, better campus, better gardening for said campus, and yes, better security. You get what you pay for.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   
reply to post by hawkiye
 


The workers controls the means of production in a socialist system.

The system you're talking about is state capitalism, which is nothing like a socialist system, it is the complete anti-thesis. You really have no clue what you are talking about. There are still plenty of privately owned corporations/businesses in the USA.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:05 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


Actually we are arguing the merits of the socialistic education system that is governed by the NEA which requires every school in the nation to teach a certain curriculum.

If it was capitalist then the local school districts would be able to set their own curriculum.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Timing
 


Private schools set their own curriculum. If you have enough money you can go to one.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Timing
reply to post by DarKPenguiN
 


For sure, but it doesn't matter if it's socialism or capitalism life isn't ever going to be fair. At least with capitalism you can work your way up to knowing people to get those kind of favors.

It still doesn't make up for the fact that the media is gawking at the mention that all schools should have an armed guard or resource officer present in all schools even though our politicians kids go to school with armed guards.

I could be wrong here (since I am only slightly paying attention to the MSM this week ) but arent they against Private Security? f so, I am as well. I am for Liaison Officers which are actual Police officers. "Armed Guards" at a school via a private company is generally a far worse than a liaison. They will call the Police for everything and once called out there will be an arrest (more likely than not) where as a liasion officer makes that call based on knowing the kids and often is far more lenient.

My worry is that we end up with "Prisons" where kids are being jailed for talking back- In fact, something similar is happening near my City right now, I cannot comment much on this but www.mlive.com... I can say that in my estimation and based on what I have heard a liaison officer would have dealt with this far different as the "threat" is...Hmmmm.... Subjective from my understanding.

Once the Police are called to a school there will be problems and a dumb (normal) teenaged mistake could be blown way out of proportion. Especially in todays climate-

So yeah, give us Officers in every school - hell, we need to do something as this is all getting out of control.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   
reply to post by WaterBottle
 


yeah but all shopping franchises get the same treatment...

oh and the banks all get the same treatment.

so that means material goods/money are worth more than us and they are more equal than we are?




edit on 25/12/2012 by Thurisaz because: expand



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Thurisaz
 



yeah but all shopping franchises get the same treatment...


The person/corporation that owns the mall pays for a private security force. The security is there to protect the merchandise in the store and real estate, not you. The same with a bank or any other private institution. Money is the most important thing in a capitalist society, not people.
edit on 25-12-2012 by WaterBottle because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 02:50 AM
link   
I find it hypocritical of the liberal-leftist elites when they sneer at the NRA for suggesting armed guards at schools, yet that is where they send their own children.

And I'm not talking soley about politicians children but many others as well.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by WaterBottle
reply to post by hawkiye
 


The workers controls the means of production in a socialist system.

The system you're talking about is state capitalism, which is nothing like a socialist system, it is the complete anti-thesis. You really have no clue what you are talking about. There are still plenty of privately owned corporations/businesses in the USA.


Here we go again where do you people keep coming from with this nonsense redefining terms socialism/communism/fascism are all the same coin with emphasis on different aspects... Sigh! I'll just post what I just got through smacking down one of your wannabe commie comrades with to end this nonsense here and now

Definition of SOCIALISM

1
: ANY of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods
2
a : a system of society or group living in which there is NO PRIVATE PROPERTY
b : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state
3 : a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done www.merriam-webster.com...

So we see it is ANY system that is COLLECTIVE or GOVERNMENT control of the means of production. Not the Romantic BS you have been fed about a glorious worker controlled utopia that has been sold for centuries but never been accomplished in the history of the world and always ended up in totalitarian tyranny and destruction...


As an economic system, fascism "IS" socialism with a capitalist veneer. The word derives from fasces, the Roman symbol of collectivism and power: a tied bundle of rods with a protruding ax. In its day (the 1920s and 1930s),..

Where socialism sought totalitarian control of a society’s economic processes through direct state operation of the means of production, fascism sought that control indirectly, through domination of nominally private owners. Where socialism nationalized property explicitly, fascism did so implicitly, by requiring owners to use their property in the “national interest”—that is, as the autocratic authority conceived it. (Nevertheless, a few industries were operated by the state.) Where socialism abolished all market relations outright, fascism left the appearance of market relations while planning all economic activities. Where socialism abolished money and prices, fascism controlled the monetary system and set all prices and wages politically. In doing all this, fascism denatured the marketplace. Entrepreneurship was abolished. State ministries, rather than consumers, determined what was produced and under what conditions...

The fascist leaders’ antagonism to communism has been misinterpreted as an affinity for capitalism. In fact, fascists’ anticommunism was motivated by a belief that in the collectivist milieu of early-twentieth-century Europe, communism was its closest rival for people’s allegiance. As with communism, under fascism, every citizen was regarded as an employee and tenant of the totalitarian, party-dominated state. Consequently, it was the state’s prerogative to use force, or the threat of it, to suppress even peaceful opposition...

Hitler’s regime eliminated small corporations and made membership in cartels mandatory.1 The Reich Economic Chamber was at the top of a complicated bureaucracy comprising nearly two hundred organizations organized along industry, commercial, and craft lines, as well as several national councils. The Labor Front, an extension of the Nazi Party, directed all labor matters, including wages and assignment of workers to particular jobs. Labor conscription was inaugurated in 1938...
www.econlib.org...

Now tell me whats the difference between the corporate bought politicans and Hitlers regime? Not much they both have used government to eliminate small business and made it mandatory to become politically connected to be able to survive the massive bureaucracy they have created to control and regulate the means of production! We do not have capitalism in America we have fascist socialism!

This is how they redistribute the wealth to themselves. Redistribution of wealth to those who did not earn it whether government or civilians is theft nothing more... Stop repeating commie BS propaganda and learn some real history!


edit on 25-12-2012 by hawkiye because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by Hawking

Originally posted by sonnny1

Originally posted by bknapple32


Not a class issue, a national security issue



I thought ALL children in America warrant the same kind of Protection?






So you support universal healthcare?


Not Obama's "version" of it. Not one FORCED down the American Public's throat........



Whats the difference. You want the exact same situation that kids who have parents who pay 35k a year for, for every kid. Thats universal education so to speak.


He isn't exactly talking about the 35k education Obama's children are getting. he is talking about the hypocrisy of a President that would infringe on the 2nd Amendment, but make sure "his own" are taken care of. these unconstitutional gun free school safety zones are leaving school administrators, teachers, custodians, and students defenseless. yet Obama makes sure "his own" are protected.

That is the hypocrisy. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
edit on 25-12-2012 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:36 AM
link   
reply to post by GeisterFahrer
 


But you are talking about apples and oranges when it comes to public and private schools. They are just too different from administration down on. I don't believe Obama has EVER said he is 100% against any kind of armed guard..

And regardless, they are different. You want your kid to have the same kind of education and safety his kids have, put them in the same school.
edit on 25-12-2012 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by GeisterFahrer
 


But you are talking about apples and oranges when it comes to public and private schools. They are just too different from administration down on. I don't believe Obama has EVER said he is 100% against any kind of armed guard..

And regardless, they are different. You want your kid to have the same kind of education and safety his kids have, put them in the same school.
edit on 25-12-2012 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)


It really isn't an apples and oranges argument. It is an argument about keeping children safe. It isn't an argument about the quality of education. Why would a President make sure his children are safe, but make it a felony for you to protect yours? It is a felony for a ccw permit holder to possess a firearm in a school safety zone. That is an infringement on the 2nd amendment.

This was never an argument about "quality of education". Your attempt to make it about education, or social healthcare are all off topic.

I also have no qualms telling you how much I despise a hypocrite - especially when the safety of children are concerned. This administration has given me a reason to despise them. His supporters have given me a reason to despise them. Rushing into a fiscal cliff and blaming it on everything and everyone else but himself is a reason to despise him. But those are not the issues in this thread. the issue is one of safety in our schools. if he feels he is "above" everyone else then he needs to step down from office. I am his boss, he is not mine.
edit on 25-12-2012 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-12-2012 by GeisterFahrer because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by GeisterFahrer
 


The people having weapons at Obama's children's school are private employees of a private institution, not civilians just meandering to the school.



posted on Dec, 25 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by GeisterFahrer

Originally posted by bknapple32
reply to post by GeisterFahrer
 


But you are talking about apples and oranges when it comes to public and private schools. They are just too different from administration down on. I don't believe Obama has EVER said he is 100% against any kind of armed guard..

And regardless, they are different. You want your kid to have the same kind of education and safety his kids have, put them in the same school.
edit on 25-12-2012 by bknapple32 because: (no reason given)


It really isn't an apples and oranges argument. It is an argument about keeping children safe. It isn't an argument about the quality of education. Why would a President make sure his children are safe, but make it a felony for you to protect yours? It is a felony for a ccw permit holder to possess a firearm in a school safety zone. That is an infringement on the 2nd amendment.

WOW...

Look, first the CCW in schools is STATE (not Federal law) and I know this because my state is changing over to allow CCW in school- So write your Governer as Obama has nothing at all to do with your school and its guns (or lack of guns)

-Next- GUN FREE SCHOOL ZONES do not mean there cannot be guards or Police- I can assure you Obamas daughters schools is probably a "Gun Free " zone as well- This does not include Police (the Post Office does though, oddly enough)

Obama is not there walking the halls and packing Iron- There are Police of Guards and ANY SCHOOL could have this (gun free or not)





new topics

top topics



 
32
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join