[beaversmom]

Not that it matters really, but this paper will be peer reviewed.

[Stand Watch Listen]

[Stand Watch Listen]

Lesson in irony

[South40]

Write about something most liberals consider to be an enigma, black conservatives. Why and how they became conservative and how they are treated by the left because they have chosen to be.

[Stand Watch Listen]

[LowOiL]

Gun laws and racist past that lead to them converting our constitutional original meanings. Can go at state or federal level (or both).

[Stand Watch Listen]

Against debt ceiling before for it (hmmm all prior 2008)

[Stand Watch Listen]

[Vince Ferrer]

I found in my student days that the further you go from the typical hot button controversioal issues, the better your grade will be. The reason is, no matter what the beliefs of the teacher, they are going to be assaulted with 50 papers whose subject is probably close to being the same current hot button issue, which makes it boring for the teacher. My instructor banned the subject of abortion. Not because of his own views, and he never said what his own views were, but because he got papers on the subject so much that he just didn't want to read them any more, and making it interesting.

My paper was on the planet Mars and some of the theories of its past history. I got an A+, with a note thanking me for coming up with an interesting topic he had never heard of before.

[PastorBooks]

Why not do a research paper on one of the classic works of conservatism?

Hayek, Friedrich A. THE ROAD TO SERFDOM.
Hayek, Friedrich A. THE CONSTITUTION OF LIBERTY
Kirk, Russell. RIGHTS AND DUTIES
Adam Smith’s famous 1776 work, THE WEALTH OF NATIONS

Maybe a book by Thomas Sowell:

Thomas Sowell, APPLIED ECONOMICS.
Thomas Sowell. RACE AND CULTURE
Thomas Sowell. VISIONS OF THE ANOINTED
Thomas Sowell. CONQUESTS AND CULTURES
Thomas Sowell. A Conflict of Visions: Ideological Origins of Political Struggles
Thomas Sowell. The Vision of the Anointed.
Thomas Sowell. The Quest for Cosmic Justice

Also:

Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Edmund Burke
Friedman
Mark Levin, Liberty and Tyranny
Mark Levin, Ameritopia: The Unmaking of America

The best way to do a good paper is to start with a good, rich, full, robust book that has some kick to it.

[USNBandit]

Kelo vs. New London. The reason being that for a liberal prof this won’t ignite the kind of anger a topic like guns might. Kelo is a sympathetic figure. From a research standpoint it will be important to understand the majority decision and how it applied to the specific law in question, not just how it violated Ms. Kelo’s rights to property.

[fella]

Write it in Spanish and if you don’t get a good grade call the teacher/professor a hater and a racist and start demonstrations. /sarc

[Vince Ferrer]

and making it interesting.

My paper was on the planet Mars and some of the theories of its past history. I got an A+, with a note thanking me for coming up with an interesting topic he had never heard of before. and making it interesting.

oops, misplaced that text.

[GraceG]

How much meddling in other people’s lives too much?

Are freedom and responsibility linked?

[Stand Watch Listen]

Red Skelton's Pledge

VIDEO: Red Skelton Pledge Of Allegiance, 14 January 1969

I: Me, an individual, a committee of one.

PLEDGE: Dedicate all of my worldly goods to give without self pity.

ALLEGIANCE: My love and my devotion.

TO THE FLAG: Our standard, Old Glory, a symbol of freedom. Wherever she waves, there's respect because your loyalty has given her a dignity that shouts freedom is everybody's job.

UNITED: That means that we have all come together.

STATES: Individual communities that have united into 48 great states. Forty-eight individual communities with pride and dignity and purpose; all divided with imaginary boundaries yet united to a common purpose, and that's love for country.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC: A state in which sovereign power is invested in representatives chosen by the people to govern. And government is the people, and it's from the people to the leaders, not from the leaders to the people.

FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION: One nation, meaning "so blessed by God."

INDIVISIBLE: Incapable of being divided.

WITH LIBERTY: Which is freedom, the right of power to live one's own life without threats, fear, or some sort of retaliation.

AND JUSTICE: The principle or quality of dealing fairly with others.

FOR ALL: For all, which means, boys and girls, it's as much your country as it is mine.

And now, boys and girls, let me hear you recite the Pledge of Allegiance:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one nation, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all."

Since I was a small boy, two states have been added to our country, and two words have been added to the Pledge of Allegiance: "under God." Wouldn't it be a pity if someone said that is a prayer, and that would be eliminated from schools too?

Red Skelton, 14 January 1969

[cynwoody]

You’re already on a great place to practice English Composition in near real time. New topic ideas (threads) appear continually. Why pay for a course in same?

[Ray76]

Some jumping off points

http://www.academia.org/the-origins-of-political-correctness/

Willi Munzenberg
http://www.lewrockwell.com/2013/12/charles-burris/useful-idiots-2/
http://www.conservapedia.com/Communist_front

“Propaganda” by Edward Bernays
http://www.historyisaweapon.com/defcon1/bernprop.html

[Stand Watch Listen]

Elementary Lesson on Your Social Security

Just in case some of you generation X, Y, Boomers) didn't know this. It's easy to check out, if you don't believe it. Be sure and show it to your family and friends. They need a little history lesson on what’s what and it doesn’t matter whether you are Democrat or Republican. FACTS ARE FACTS.

Social Security Cards, up till the 1980s, expressly stated the number and card were not to be used for identification purposes. Since nearly everyone in the United States now has a number, it became convenient to use it anyway and the message, NOT FOR IDENTIFICATION, was removed.

Here’s an old Social Security Card with the “NOT FOR DENTIFICATION” notation.

Our Social Security
When Franklin Roosevelt, a Democrat, introduced the Social Security (FICA) Program. He promised

1. That participation in the Program would be Completely voluntary,
---------No longer voluntary.

2. That the participants would only have to pay 1% of the first $1,400 of their annual incomes into the Program.
---------Now, 7.65% on the first $90,000

3. That the money the participants elected to put into the Program would be deductable from their income for tax purposes each year.
---------No longer tax deductable

4. That the money the participants put into the independent ‘Trust Fund’ rather than into the general operating fund, and therefore, would only be used to fund the Social Security Retirement Fund, and not into any other Government program.
--------- under President Johnson the SS monies were moved/comingled to the US General Fund and spent on the War on Poverty and Vietnam

5. That the annuity payments to the retirees would never be taxed as income.
---------Under Clinton & Gore, up to 85% of your Social Security can be taxed.

Since many have paid into FICA for years and are now receiving a Social Security check every month—and then now finding that we are taxed on 85% on the monies we had paid to the Federal Government to ‘put away (lock box / Trust Fund)’—you may be interested in the following:

Q: Which political party took Social Security from the independent ‘Trust Fund’ and placed SS into the general fund so that the Administration/Congress could spend it?

A: It was Lyndon Johnson and the Democrat controlled House and Senate.

Q: Which political party eliminated the income tax deduction for Social Security (FICA) withholding?

A: The Democrat Party

Q: Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A: The Democrat Party, with Al Gore casting the ‘tie-breaking’ deciding vote as President of the Senate, while Gore was Vice President of the US.

Q: Which political party decided to start giving annuity payments to immigrants?

A: President Jimmy Carter and the Democrat Party. Immigrants moved into this county, and at age 65, began to receive Social Security payments. The Democrat Party gave these payments to them, even though MANY never paid anything into SS.

Then, after violating the original SS contract (FICA), the Democrats turn around and attempt to convince the US populace that the Republicans want to take your Social Security away! Similar to the Democrats misdirecting, lying about the truth how the Democrats really opposed the Civil Rights movements/laws. And the worst reality about it is uninformed citizens (low information voters) believe these incessant lies, enabled by an elitist media and limousine liberals

[BradyLS]

Dr. Walter E. Williams (who sometimes substitutes for Rush) recently posted a great article about “Spending and Morality.”

http://townhall.com/columnists/walterewilliams/2014/07/09/spending-and-morality-n1859549

You might ague in favor of a strict interpretation of the “General Welfare” clause of the Constitution versus the loose interpretation that politician’s use to justify all sorts of wonton spending.

Basically, argue against wasting tax-payer’s dollars and show the ways how it happens today. Argue why its bad and, for the other side, argue why politicians think it’s necessary.

Another interesting topic might be an argument paper against interventionist foreign policies versus what past administrations have followed since World Wars One and Two. Pat Buchanan often writes about this subject. His latest about it is here:

http://buchanan.org/blog/heres-barack-obama-richard-nixon-common-foreign-policy-6667

These articles are meant to get your thoughts going on a couple interesting topics. Remember to cite your sources! Don’t plagiarize! (You have to tell even the professionals not to do that these days! :-D )

[Razz Barry]

I like to argue with liberals. Here's an argument, if you believe in man made climate change, you should be against amnesty. Studies show people from poor countries increase their carbon footprint when they immigrate to a wealthy country. So, deporting illegal aliens is good for the environment.
You could argue that illegals don't do jobs Americans won't do, they do jobs Americans on Welfare should be doing. We have government housing projects full of low skilled Americans, and our schools pump out more every year.
Here's another, the federal government borrows 40cents of every dollar it spends. This will have to be repaid by future generations who have had no voice in how it was spent. Is this not taxation without representation?