Comments on: Socialist Teams Dominate College Football. Again.

By: minanewyork

minanewyork — Thu, 13 Oct 2011 14:19:15 +0000

Thanks for this update

By: Barrett Brooms

Barrett Brooms — Sun, 13 Jun 2010 00:31:26 +0000

I can’t believe that Big Red is joining the Big Ten. The future promises to be esciting. Yowzers

By: Benito Abdelmuti

Benito Abdelmuti — Sun, 16 May 2010 22:46:49 +0000

I found you by Bing and just wanted to say thank you for the informative scores entry!

By: Sterling Bartlett

Sterling Bartlett — Thu, 06 May 2010 16:05:59 +0000

5 star!

By: Daniel m

Daniel m — Wed, 23 Dec 2009 07:29:21 +0000

While we're on the topic…The NFL is the epitome of socialism. Help the poor (1st pick of the draft) and try to keep the playing field level (salary cap).

By: Marc

Marc — Sun, 20 Dec 2009 06:11:51 +0000

USPS has to by law drive down each and every street in th e US while UPS, Fedex are on an as need basis. USPS is the only some what effective government run enterprise. College football is in the vast majority of cases self funding and helps to fund many of the other sports that colleges offer.

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:28:45 +0000

That second sentence didn't make sense…How can conservatives justify deriding the cost of health care while giving a blank check to war?

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:20:10 +0000

Finally, your point on Afghanistan is well-taken and, I think the more ironic. How can conservatives justify calling for smaller government and the outrageous cost of expansion while giving a blank check to war? Just as ironic is the Nobel Peace Laureate arguing for Augustinian Just War.

By: Jim

Jim — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 12:17:40 +0000

I'm not sure why my comments were cut off. My first half was sent for approval and my second remarks were immediately posted, but it's probably better if half my words are lost in some virtual abyss. Let's just stick to your response, which, of course, makes some good points. See what a little spirited debate can do? Ok, so can we agree that, maybe (just maybe) the state school as heath care analogy might not work that well? You argue that private education costs more than public and I'll agree that, really, you get the same product. But then again, BCS rankings don't account for cost either. Take two of your examples…Alabama and Tulane. I'd be willing to bet that the Green Wave's football budget couldn't come close to affording just one year of $32 million the Crimson Tide pays Nick Saban.

Your second point is a good one. I don't suspect a public option would be the end of private health care, just as you point out that UPS and FedEx have thrived with the USPS around. But still, I don't see how the government can continue to subsidize $4 billion losses every year. The problem with (especially Federal programs) is that they end up costing more than we plan and, at this point our spending is going to catch up with us.

By: Chris Courtney

Chris Courtney — Wed, 16 Dec 2009 03:13:13 +0000

Again, what does it say about a country when the same people who reject using public funds to ensure no one goes without health care are the same ones who support taxing its people to build football stadiums? Furthermore, what does it say about a country when committing more troops to Afghanistan recieves broad support while a plan to cover 46 million uninsured Americans is fought against so vehemently?

To quote an article in today's Politico; " It is never a good sign when a large domestic program is less popular than a long guerrilla war".