jump to last post 1-24 of 24 discussions (122 posts)

"GOP sweep: Big governor victories in Virginia, NJ": Yahoo!

  1. fishskinfreak2008 profile image31
    fishskinfreak2008posted 7 years ago

    More bad news for Obama

  2. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I'm not surprised with VA, but NJ? Wow. That's like a navy blue state.

  3. twalker74 profile image84
    twalker74posted 7 years ago

    …and great news for deregulation! Maybe Enron gets a pardon. That means better news for the middle class...uh… I can't wait to continue to cough up my 33% in taxes why those who didn't suffer job displacement and constant threats of layoff get their tax write-offs back.

    Of course, then again, with the lowest unemployment and government surplus wiped out under Bush, why am I not celebrating? I got my $200 surplus checks that didn’t cover anything but student loans and left me in debt. In addition, it took away my job security and my belief in free enterprise. Thank God, we got the neo-cons back. Goldwater is turning in his grave. Conservatives will implement their church and moral agendas, squeeze the small business with no help on health care and limit the power of wage increases for lower classes. You are correct. Yeah! Republican control is coming!

  4. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    You want some cheese with that?

  5. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    LOL, above.  Well written (twalker, never TK)!

    What I would say is that 3.25 years is a long time (I'll just bet the economy improves in that time), and the Republicans are digging their graves deeper and deeper.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Aw, no love for a fellow 'professional'?

      1. twalker74 profile image84
        twalker74posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Haha, much love for the "professional." I have no issue with the haves wanting to hold on. It is natural. And I believe that anyone who has worked hard to gain financial stability deserves to hold onto it. I am no economist and would like to believe that a flat tax is the most rational answer to tax issues. Yet, I have talked with a professor at Cal State Dominguez some time back and he explained the problems. They made a little sense, but honestly, most was beyond my understanding.

        I was a long-living-card-caring-member of conservative "values." Now I say conservative in the sense of William F Buckley and Berry Goldwater. Still, every time this country has allowed business to run on its own, problems don't leak out, they explode. You give a break to people and instead of reinvesting in the company they give bonuses and shareholder bumps. Yes, that is how it works, but it doesn't make it right. The Republican Party (by the way I was raised) was a party of intellectuals. I am hard pressed to find this group alive in the Party now. And due to the current economic situation, I believe true free market viability is about as probable as Marxism, Locke-ism, true Democracy, or any wonderfully constructed governmental philosophy. Our inherent imperfections mean we require regulation and guidance. I am not happy about paying higher taxes to level the  playing field, but it is better than the chips being taken away and I am not given a shot.

        and thanks Lita

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Sounds good

          1. twalker74 profile image84
            twalker74posted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Just do me a favore and be my patron so I can write when you are il Padrone. The Medici did do wonderful things for the Enlightenment.

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Bribes cheerfully accepted!

    2. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, those damn Republicans are in fear of Obama and the gang! roll

      1. twalker74 profile image84
        twalker74posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        And that is what scares me. Fear is far more effective in politics than any other emotion.

        1. profile image0
          A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Fear is what got Obammy elected, that and stupidity.

          1. Ralph Deeds profile image70
            Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            You mean Bush's stupidity.

            1. profile image0
              A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Yeah Ralph, thats what I mean! lol lol lol lol lol

    3. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Yeah, winning big is a real disaster.

    4. Eaglekiwi profile image74
      Eaglekiwiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      The Labor Union would like to donate all their tools in storage lol

  6. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Yep, that 3.25 years will be a VERY long time for some of us.

  7. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I think the GOP wins in VA and NJ are going to have a profound impact on the Blue Dogs and how they vote for the health care bill - especially the ones from red states. Most of our representatives are more worried about re-election than about helping US citizens.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Bingo!

  8. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I respectfully disagree, Tex. What got BO elected was the hope and belief that he wasn't just another politician. Hope springs eternal...

    1. Flightkeeper profile image78
      Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Well they didn't get a politician.  They got a community organizer.  How's that working for us?

    2. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Isn't that the definition of stupidity? "that he wasn't just another politician" anyone who thought that after all that was discovered before the election would have to be stupid!

      1. twalker74 profile image84
        twalker74posted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I did think that when the Dem's pitched it, but his strategy so far has been identical with FDR and the Depression. The weekly podcasts instead of the radio and throwing money at anything that looks bad. FDR caught the same crap BO is catching. From being a socialist all the way down to a complete failure. He barely won his second election because Americans (and I am one) think that it should already be solved. But how can a problem be solved in nine months? It always takes a shorter time to destroy something than to build. The New Deal didn't really work because it was primarily government paid jobs, but the attitude changed. Obama's problem is that the other side is paying attention to the past and trying to push down optimism. We love the victory—the aftereffects are meaningless.

        1. ledefensetech profile image79
          ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Are you aware that FDR ran on a platform to end the spending programs initiated by...wait for it...Herbert Hoover?  It's true, look up his speeches during the 1932 campaign and you'll see for yourself. 

          Contrast that with what Harding did in 1920.  The economy was in dire straits back then as well, the only difference from 1929 was that there was not a spectacular stock market dive like 1929.  Banks were still closing, manufacturers were still laying people off, it was a depression.  Harding did nothing and a year later, we were in the midst of the Roaring Twenties.

          Look at what Regan did, cut taxes, eliminated excess liquidity and the stagflation of the 1970's was gone.  Things have always improved when we have leadership in Washington which leaves things alone and always makes things worse when they get involved.

  9. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    I didn't vote for him, but I naively thought that just maybe he'd be different.

    1. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      He is our first communist President, thats different!

      Sorry, FDR was the first communist.

    2. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      He has been different. And despite all the things the people on both the right and left have pretended to believe he said while on the campaign trail, he is steadily doing exactly what he said he would do.

      The problem is that a lot of people imagined him saying he would do things that he never promised.

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Yes.  This.

  10. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Tex, that's just not true - he is NOT a communist.

    He's a socialist.

    1. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      He's one of those "ists"

  11. rhamson profile image75
    rhamsonposted 7 years ago

    The wins in VA an NJ have got the spinning pundits fighting to be heard. The election is meaningless because the right candidates won over some pretty crappy ones.  The pundits would have you buy into it having a statement as to Obamas popularity.  He had to appear at these functions because he is the head of the party.

    If the republicans can present a candidate that has some idea as to how to run the country in 2012 Obama may not repeat. If that is the case then the better candidate will have been elected.

    Remember these elactions are now being determined by independents and not the two parties.

  12. Flightkeeper profile image78
    Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago

    lol

    1. rhamson profile image75
      rhamsonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      That's the most intelligent thing I think I have ever heard you say! Keep up the good work. smile

      1. Flightkeeper profile image78
        Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Don't get mad just because your party lost. lol

        1. rhamson profile image75
          rhamsonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          What do you mean?  My party decides the elections now. Remember the independents.  We vote issues not bias.

          1. Flightkeeper profile image78
            Flightkeeperposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            lol lol I'm having a good day.  You try to have a good one too.

            1. rhamson profile image75
              rhamsonposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              You too my friend smile

  13. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Did we "imagine" that BO said lobbyists and special interest groups would have no role in his White House, or than unemployment would not go above 8% if the stimulus passed, or that Gitmo would be closed? He also promised no increase in taxes for the middle class. Most pundits agree that there will have to be an increase in taxes to pay for the health care bill - including those on the middle class. BO excoriated McCain for suggesting insurance policies be taxed, now his Congress is suggesting doing the same thing.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Oh, you're just 'hating'! If you point out any other facts you may even be racist!

  14. rhamson profile image75
    rhamsonposted 7 years ago

    Ralph, don't take him too seriously. No one else does.

    1. profile image0
      A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol

    2. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      I take him a lot more seriously than I do you.

      1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
        Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Which should be very troubling to Tex. wink

  15. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Ditto, tk!

  16. Ralph Deeds profile image70
    Ralph Deedsposted 7 years ago

    Don't exaggerate the significance of the GOP wins in Virginia and New Jersey. Creigh Deeds ran a poor campaign, and several positions he took were quite conservative--opposed a health care public option, opposed cap and trade legislation, said public employees should not be unionized. This meant that Virginia voters' choice was between a conservative and a very conservative. Not a good way to inspire the Democratic base. In New Jersey, Corzine lost on his own record of failing to deliver on some of his promises. Obama's approval rating in New Jersey is 61%. In NYC Bloomberg, a Rhino republican or closet Democrat and a friend of Obama, spent a record $100 million to win that race.

    And of course, nobody has mentioned the defeat of Doug Hoffman, the right wing whackjob candidate for Congress in upstate New York. After shooting the GOP candidate in the head, Palin, Limbaugh, Michelle Malkin, Glenn Beck and other right wing ideologues supported Hoffman who ran as a Conservative Party candidate. Despite the support of the right wing of the GOP Hoffman lost decisively to the Democrat Bill Owens.

    Thus, none of the elections signify a GOP revival.

    1. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      There was a great column by David Brooks in the NYT a month ago - he pointed out that Limbaugh, Beck, Hannity and others have virtually no influence on candidates and elections. We can add Sarah Palin to that list now, too.

      I love that this district was Republican for over 100 years, and finally got a Democrat the minute those loons started weighing in on the race.

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        They are just horrible advertising or PR for 'their' party (and it seems by default, as the Repubs flounder for any grip on reality, it is becoming 'their' party).  I cannot believe there are people who take anything they say seriously--it's like looking in a funny mirror--their vision and views (and those of whom support them, as well) are so distorted.

        I'm glad Owens won.  However, I agree this "Republican backlash/takeover" story is naught but an exaggeration. But hey, it's good copy and sells papers, especially when some parties out there are grasping at straws.

        1. livelonger profile image88
          livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I think over the next 5-10 years, some actual leaders will emerge from the right-wing echo chamber and aggregate a viable party (which will annoy the pundits and the dittoheads, but hopefully by then they'll realize they're irrelevant). Until then, to paraphrase Bill Maher, we have a center-right governing party (the Democrats). smile

          1. profile image0
            A Texanposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Irrelevant, you libs crack me up

            1. livelonger profile image88
              livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              As my quote makes clear, the feeling is mutual. lol

        2. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          LOL! Next year is gonna be so much fun. I don't know what I'll enjoy more, the desperate spin or the silence of seething bitterness. It'll be fun to find out!

          1. profile image0
            Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            You are not strong on nuance...but then we all know that.

            eck...

          2. Ron Montgomery profile image60
            Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            You could just go ahead and decide now.  Will you be spinning or silent?

            1. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I will be neither.

              1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Oh I see.  You'll just repeat the same B.S. and hope it makes sense in 2010?  Good luck with that.

                1. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  What BS would that be?

                  1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
                    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    So many ridiculous TK posts...so little time.  Let's see there's

                    "hey, no personal attacks"  (as if you're not the main perpetrator)

                    "Obama is a Communist"

                    "Republicans are smart gol darnnit"

                    " I AM NOT AN ANIMALLLLLLLLLLLLLL"

        3. ledefensetech profile image79
          ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I think you're understating the significance or missing the significance of Doug Hoffman.  Sure he lost but that may have been just as much because of Scozzafava as Owens.  From my understanding New York doesn't have a primary and this may have had an effect on the campaign of the principals involved.  Had Hoffman had more than a month or so of campaign time, he might very well have won. 

          More important than the party, Lita, is the message, wouldn't you agree?  The significance of the Hoffman candidacy is that there may be an emerging third choice.  You like to ridicule the Tea Party and 9/12 people, but I think in doing so you underestimate the movement. 

          It may very well be that things will be politics as usual in 2010 and even 2012, but the following elections may be rather surprising.  When you get down to it, both parties are corrupt and are in the game for their supporters only.  There is a rather large part of the population that is locked out of the political process because there really is no good choices for them.  Hoffman's candidacy shows that things might be changing, for all of us.

          1. profile image0
            Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            The East is not the Midwest...or, God forbid, Alaska, LDT.  Needless to say, the NYT, as well as Newt Gingrich (even), may agree with me.

            I don't "like to ridicule," the Tea Party people; that must be your assumption of what a liberal does.  But yes, I find them irrelevant: ie, people whose basic political ideology is to hate the idea of ideas in general do not have my respect.  This is absolutely NOT a 3rd party that I would like to see arise.

            1. ledefensetech profile image79
              ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              I think that people put too much emphasis on location and traditionally blue vs traditionally red states or districts or whatever.  You're right, I make assumptions.  Mea culpa, mea culpa, mea maxima culpa.

              How do you get from people who want to see limited government being people who hate ideas?  I'm a proponent of no government, but I'm willing to go back to a limited one because no government is kind of an advanced concept for people educated under a Progressive public educational system.

              As for the Dems, doesn't it bother you that groups like ACORN are actively encouraging things like getting housing for people who plan to engage in the underage sex trade or that SEIU members beat and kicked a guy handing out American flags at a town hall meeting in St. Louis?  What about the "Obama Truth Squad"?  Nationally it was worth a sound bite or two, but here in Missouri, it was big news.  Especially when the State Patrol released a report a few months later equating veterans with "right wing militias", something that also covered the Justice Department in the first few months of Obama's administration.

              http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/17825
              http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123992665198727459.html

              Isn't this the sort of thing that led to Waco and Ruby Ridge?  The ATF and FBI wanted a PR coup and by their bungling, things went horribly wrong.

              1. profile image0
                Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                The ACORN connection to Obama/the Democratic party I consider too stupid to even discuss.  Sorry, LDT...  But Newsweek and other valid news sources have called any connection patently false.

                The look at militia and right wing conspiracy groups I know a little about...as that is all under our former Governor, Napolitano.  Actually, the report was initially shouted down, only to be resurrected again, after several supposedly right wing extremist inspired violent acts have ocurred (such as the Holocaust museum incident).  And, uh, no.  I don't see how you equate this with what went down in Waco.  The study concentrates on possible public threats, given the social climate existing today.  I see it as wise, before more lynchings like what happened to the censor worker in the deep south occur.

                And it remains my opinion that the misinformed (for whatever reason)...and sometimes just crazy...really have no business in setting any sort of policy.  It isn't an advanced concept not to have concepts.  lol  I am a proponent of a natural meritocracy governing (if you remember that conversation, LDT).  I may lean left in some ways, but I am a realist (and that doesn't equate to elitist either).  I just don't want a Sarah Palin anywhere near any meaningful buttons.

                1. tksensei profile image59
                  tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Too inconvenient, too uncomfortable, too indefensible...

                  1. profile image0
                    Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    Too stupid and already proven insane...like some other 'things.'  Better to ignore.

                2. ledefensetech profile image79
                  ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                  Too stupid to discuss?  Oh well.  All I'll say is that authority doesn't automatically confer veracity.  The only real authority with which we can speak with any true knowledge is our own experiences.



                  That report came out long before that census worker was murdered, so you really can't say that those reports prevented much of anything.  Even so, are you assuming that veterans are responsible for that.  The report said that veterans were likely to join "right wing militias".



                  A natural meritocracy, eh?  Ever read Thomas Jefferson and what he had to say about a natural meritocracy?  I think you and he would get along famously.  You may have an issue with "crazy" people setting policy, but I have a problem with people setting policy to help out their friends while forgetting their oaths they took upon entering office.

                  1. profile image0
                    Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                    I have satisfied myself, LDT, that the ACORN 'matter' is closed by reading several valid sources.  And your saying that all we have is our own experiences is actually quite postmodern of you:  read lol, perceived as liberal as a philosophy.

                    And, well, my bf is a Vet...but/and a liberal.  He doesn't seem threatened by the reports at all.  Must be how the reports are being portrayed by the rightist press that is the issue, I'd imagine.

                    And trust me, if the Sarah Palins or other loonies were left to run the asylum, we'd be SOL beyond people calling in favors.  I've seen it done in businesses--trust me, that's enough.  I'm all in favor of bright people. smile  It may just be my prejudice, but one I'm comfortable with.

            2. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Have you ever so much as set foot in Alaska?

              1. profile image0
                Madame Xposted 7 years ago in reply to this

                Alaska is a magnificently beautiful place that is actually fiscally sound, with no income tax. Imagine that smile

            3. tksensei profile image59
              tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Have you ever heard even one person who ever attended one Tea Party ever say that was their political ideology? Or is this just another arrogant dismissal and dishonest representation of American citizens who might have commited the sin of holding views that do not accord with your own?

      2. profile image0
        sneakorocksolidposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        No influence? Then why a fairness doctrine?

        1. livelonger profile image88
          livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          Believe me, I'm totally against a "fairness doctrine."

  17. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    Looks like it's gonna be 'spin.'


















































    Oh, and good job "never posting on the forums again." LOL

  18. Uninvited Writer profile image82
    Uninvited Writerposted 7 years ago

    Well, we shall just see how it goes...

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Exactly.

  19. habee profile image91
    habeeposted 7 years ago

    Why do you guys get so upset when debating politics? Can't we just debate like adults?

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Are you new here?

  20. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    The dialogue here is so brilliant I must make digital copies!  But then it is to be expected, wink.

    1. Ron Montgomery profile image60
      Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Aw, c'mon now!

      "You didn't answer my question" is worthy of John Updike

      (psssst TK, Updike was an author of pictureless books.)

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I thought you were real fond of pictures.

  21. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    .............hilarious


    roll

  22. Ron Montgomery profile image60
    Ron Montgomeryposted 7 years ago

    hmm

  23. tksensei profile image59
    tksenseiposted 7 years ago

    With friendly, down-to-earth, hard working people. But, I guess some folks could never forgive the crime of not being NY or LA...

    1. livelonger profile image88
      livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Jack Donaghy learned his lesson last week. Have you?

      1. tksensei profile image59
        tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        I've never watched that show, so your reference lacks impact.

        1. livelonger profile image88
          livelongerposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          NYC and LA have down-to-earth, hard-working people. But, I guess some folks would never consider them "real America."

          1. tksensei profile image59
            tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            They do indeed, but some people there (or who wished they were there) seem to forget the parts in between the two.

  24. profile image0
    Leta Sposted 7 years ago

    No, LDT.  I don't think all politicians are corrupt.  I think it is a more complex matter than that.  Perhaps the more you see, the less absolutes you see.  Certainly there is corruption...more than anything, I think perhaps, there are egos and people who seek/have a need to control.  These are actually mentally ill, I believe, but also have the qualities to propel them to positions of power...

    There is an interesting book I want to buy:

    Evil Genes: Why Rome Fell, Hitler Rose, Enron Failed and My Sister Stole My Mother’s Boyfriend

    http://www.barbaraoakley.com/_font_face … _61276.htm

    She looks at this very idea.

    But I think there are decent people who serve in the government (as well as in other institutions--I make no exception for private or public entities, as we have discussed) as well.  The point is in the idea of "service" as leadership rather than the old, weary idea of presumed privilege and a big ego reigning supreme.

    And, yeah.  I believe the economy is improving (as it always does...I'm beginning to think most people are rather like children who cannot see past the next 'quarter').  However, in all honesty, that cannot be placed on Obama's shoulders if it improves or if it does not improve.

    1. tksensei profile image59
      tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      Meaning you think you've 'seen' more than he has?

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Um, go away.  Go look up post modernism.  Jeez, maybe you are 19.

        1. tksensei profile image59
          tksenseiposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          And I live in Kansas, right?  roll

    2. ledefensetech profile image79
      ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

      If you really want to know what's going to happen, you need to look at the history of monetary policy.  Very illuminating.  Funny you should mention the Roman Empire, most of their decline was due to economics:  http://mises.org/story/3663

      I rather think there are players who want us focused only on this quarter or the next quarter.  I'm a fan of talking a look at the big picture. 

      I was, perhaps, too strong in my denunciation of politicians, many do at least start out with good intentions.  And there are a number of good and decent people who work in government.  In fact, I'm acquainted with quite a few people like that and often times they're the only think that keeps things going. 

      Didn't we talk about Maslow and his self esteem stage being made up of two parts at one time?  Those who achieve that stage and move on to self actualization and those who remain trapped in the esteem stage because of their nature to control and be worshiped by the objects of their control.

      At any rate, I'll have to keep an eye out for Evil Genes, the premise is interesting, but I think the true cause of things like empires falling is a bit more complex than that.

      1. profile image0
        Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

        Of course it is more complex than that.  lol  Beyond psychology, we come to sociology.  But part of the puzzle. smile

        And you are right concerning Maslow...however that is configured.  It's a bastardization somehow--narcissism and megalomania.

        1. ledefensetech profile image79
          ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

          I just call it spoiled brat.  I saw it a lot with over permissive parents and those who had nothing at all to do with their kids.

          1. profile image0
            Leta Sposted 7 years ago in reply to this

            Oakley seems to suggest it is more complex than that, wink.

            No...I imagine it is both nature/nurture as I know it is discussed.  Because as you can see within families, even, some good, intact parents have some insane outa control kids...and it looks like it makes no sense.

            1. ledefensetech profile image79
              ledefensetechposted 7 years ago in reply to this

              Some research seems to point to both being a factor.  Genome determines possibility while environment determines the manifestation.  A lot of my dad's family are alcoholics, for example, yet neither my brother, sister nor I drink to excess, nor do we have a craving for it.  My sister is a bit more wild than my brother and I, mostly because by the time they got around to her they were pretty permissive.  10 years between her and I is a bit much to expect for consistency I guess.

              Still, I've worked with kids who seemed hellbent on killing themselves, drinking themselves to death, having a kid before they were out of highschool, etc. and that particular kid, I'm very happy to say has gone on to college, has a two year old and doing very well by all accounts.  I can think of another kid we treated who was very bright and had everything going for her who took up with an older man, is an alcoholic and dropped out of school.  If I learned anything from that, it's that you never can tell.

 
working