Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "CBS Chicago" channel.

  1. Why are so many veterans homeless?
    14
  2. Did she lie on the forms? This was her late husband's SSA benefit. She's entitled to it now.
    7
  3. ​@user-hg2tk3xj9y Of course she is. There is an offset, not a full denial of benefits. If she told the truth on her application, and the government failed to offset, that's the government's problem.
    6
  4. NO SHE DIDN'T. Don't you grasp what the issue is? Certain state employees, like police officers, firefighters, and TEACHERS, plus school support staff, have an offset on their SSA. If they filled out the forms correctly and the government made a mistake, and failed to offset, that shouldn't be their problem.
    6
  5. By the fact that he has a record? No.
    6
  6.  @timbaldwin6283  Or reenter through Mexico.
    5
  7. ​ @johnosborne4404  Exactly. It's fundraising for November. It's working better than any other scheme they ever concocted.
    3
  8. @user-hg2tk3xj9y  False. If you put ten quarters into the Social Security system, you do qualify for a pension, with offset, even with a teacher's pension. If you are married for ten years, but never paid into Social Security yourself, you do receive your deceased spouse's Social Security, but with a major offset, larger than if you yourself had paid into the system. The woman featured was not a teacher, and did not strike me as terribly cerebral. If she filled out the forms truthfully, the math is the government's problem, not hers. If she lied, then that's different. There is no reason to think she engineered a fraud. Prove it.
    3
  9. Testimony is immunized, short of perjury.
    2
  10. ​@SlottingFloppies Most whack-job multiple joy killings are YWM, not BM over 30. Don't go to superhero movies in Colorado, or political rallies in Pennsylvania.
    2
  11. Maybe it was personal health information they choose not to repeat? I'm speculating, but that happens a lot.
    2
  12. You would do it, if you could?
    2
  13. Anyone with serious money is . . .
    1
  14. Stop misinformation
    1
  15. Then exactly WHAT is the college classroom for? Glorified job training? Carefully curated donor-pleasing discourse? Wait. Don't answer that.
    1
  16. Look, she did a terrible job of standing up for free speech. She accepted Stefanik's false framing and demagoguery, and did not even attempt to explain First Amendment law --- and she is a legal scholar(!!!)
    1
  17. @mr.e1026  No, you are not right. Every university, public and private, maintains First Amendment fora on campus, and the rules in force consist of the full panoply of First Amendment rights as developed in a long series of cases: Brandenburg, RAV v. City of St. Paul (be sure to read that one), Phelps (the Westboro Baptist Church case), and many others. The rules that govern such a forum are NOT the rules that govern the dormitories, classrooms, dining halls, amphitheaters, libraries, and other places where students study and live, and where a code of conduct is in full force -- or supposed to be. The rules that allow some students to chant pro-Palestinian slogans on the quad (whose meaning, by the way, is a matter of legitimate controversy) are THE VERY SAME RULES that allow students to fly an Israeli flag and support Likud. The very same. That neither one can do it in a dining hall, or when targeting individuals in a confrontational manner, doesn't mean they are subject to discipline for a lawful demonstration taking place on a designated First Amendment forum. You could consult PEN America for an excellent explanation, which these university presidents were utterly incapable of articulating. Or, you could just join the anti-free speech crowd. The First Amendment protects you as well, in your rush to embrace that position. The Fourth Amendment has been trashed for safety-ism, why not the First? BY THE WAY, I was working in a government office when the US was on one of its bombing activities, against where my immigrant parents were from. A coworker praised the bombing in front of me, but expressed concern about the architecture being destroyed. Did I have a "discrimination" claim? Oh please. Don't be absurd.
    1
  18.  @mr.e1026  I see my reply was not highlighted. I wonder if it has been sense oared as well? That would fit perfectly.
    1
  19. ​@gpop7911 OH!! Of COURSE! Stefanik: smart. Raking in donations. The students protesting: dumb. They won't make money.
    1
  20. Not Jews as such. Wealthy donors. Norman Finkelstein was also fired from DePaul, and they settled his lawsuit.
    1
  21. @user-hg2tk3xj9y  Innocent until proven guilty. And she was not a teacher. I know a lot of people her age who never had a demanding education and are remarkably uninformed. I even know some with an education who will believe the lady at the bakery (or the thrift store) before they believe me. Also, where I live, a LOT of teachers also worked other jobs and paid into the SSA system for 40 quarters. You expect a teacher to last 40 years in an urban school system? To vest a pension is already a feat. I wish it were not so. :/
    1
  22. @user-hg2tk3xj9y  I even know someone who put in 120 quarters toward Social Security, then taught long enough to vest a teacher's pension, then took that at age 65 and took Social Security at 70. Full benefits, zero offset. She is a rare case, but she did it. Working summers as a student helped complete those quarters, then never being unemployed. (Luck was obviously a factor, as one small company she worked for closed due to embezzlement by an owner's son. It had no real effect on her. She found a new job immediately.)
    1
  23. If a professor gave this assignment as mandatory, then downgraded papers which took issue with the terminology and the basic premise of the assignment while addressing, in general, the impact of war on a densely populated area (which in the present case could also include Israel proper), THAT would be a reason not to renew her contract. But this?? Seriously??
    1
  24. The ICJ broached the topic and used the term. Others who are scholars in the field agree. What would have been worthwhile would have been to frame the use of the term as a question, rather than a statement of consensus, given that no consensus at present exists. Pretending that "genocide" cannot possibly apply to the war on Gaza because it is nowhere near the worst example of genocide in recent history is not persuasive at all.
    1
  25.  @noahghost4476  Well then, what do you think of Mearshimer's argument that intent can indeed be inferred in this instance? Or the ICJ's findings, for that matter, which considered evidence of intent? If you are trying to say genocide has not been proved, that's fine. That's true. If you think there is no evidence that it could be taking place, you're wrong.
    1
  26.  @noahghost4476  Also, if she had downgraded any paper that questioned the basic premise of there being a genocide, then she would have deserved to be fired. Critical thinking means scrutinizing every word, not letting it go because Teacher Said, or something.
    1
  27. @noahghost4476  Both my parents had Jewish ancestry on their paternal side. My mother lost one grandmother in the Holocaust. Both families of course lost everything they had. Five days after the October 7 attack, I came down with COVID for the first time. I know it was from the emotional jolt; passing through crowded international airports on no sleep ten times during the previous year had no effect on me. I didn't get so much as a cold. I recommend listening to Amy Goodman. She has made a point of condemning terrorism AND giving voice to Israelis for peace and justice. Sometimes it's unbearable to watch, it's SO sad. Some have devoted decades to the issue. Some, like Neve Gordon, were once war heroes (he was injured defending a kibbutz). (Tell me, do you even know who that is??)
    1
  28.  @nicbentulan  Listen to Amy. Listen to Bernie. You ought to.
    1
  29. Oh! I thought these were adults! They're just kids, little snowflakes! Teacher said a Bad Word.
    1
  30. It's a dreadful federal law. Many workers with state pensions, such as police officers, firefighters, other first responders, teachers, and other school personnel have an offset on their Social Security pension. If she vested Social Security by working 40 quarters, her offset will be small, and if she waits to age 70 to draw on it, the effect is small. If she inherited her husband's Social Security, the offset is enormous. Looks like Social Security made a mistake. As long as she filled out all the forms correctly, they shouldn't be able to claw back so much money for their own mistake. :/
    1
  31. America needs more readers. Fat chance.
    1
  32. "All the speech that money can buy . . . "
    1
  33. What other colleges did they visit?
    1
  34. How so? By asking students to use reason in evaluating claims about the impact of the war on Gaza, in an optional assignment? That used to be considered Socratic, and an antidote to mindless passion.
    1
  35. Godspeed. I love people who stand up for themselves.
    1
  36. ​ @Pugetwitch  Is that your hope? Or are you a seer? 😂
    1
  37. ​@Pugetwitch People who psychoanalyze others are very unlucky in life. Sometimes bad luck happens soon after their aggressive psychobabble. 😂
    1
  38. ​ @WolfhoundPilot  A tent on a spacious quad disrupts absolutely no one.
    1
  39. Seriously? People don't know about the Blue Line?
    1
  40. Mobs form, dissolve, and form again with frightening frequency --- faster faster faster. "We were always at war with East Asia."
    1
  41. ​ @LabSessionz  Care to point out what you mean?
    1
  42. @dallasneudorf  You stated her word choice made them feel excluded. How can you conclude from their "feeling" excluded that they were being excluded? That doesn't follow. The assignment wasn't mandatory. Was there any prohibition against writing a paper that begins by questioning the premise? When I was in college, the Marxists understood that in class, they would be required to master the syllabus, which was usually set by conservative Republicans, and only then to read Marxist sources in self-organized study groups. Most of these students also had jobs. Rarely did the profs mark down the Marxists (and everyone knew who those profs were, who would do such a thing), and the Marxists didn't think to complain about their workload.
    1
  43.  @LabSessionz  And as of this moment, I'm not allowed to answer that. It all dovetails beautifully.
    1
  44. @dallasneudorf     This gives students a veto over teachers --- which means you no longer have a university. Which is, in turn, perhaps the most honest admission of where we stand. Universities have been businesses for a long time. The "learning environment" is analogous to the modern office, where free speech has no place. Students have the remarkable dual role of customer and worker, but the real clientele are the donors and the business community that will eventually pay them money. My views don't matter. Theirs must be served. But, tell me, what happens when the students don't all agree about the impact a professor has on the "learning environment?" For example, there were serious demonstrations against firing Norman Finkelstein. Of course, let's be real. Students' views can't override those donors. I mean, after all, students come and go. The donors possess the true hecklers' veto, and if things get heated, law enforcement will be summoned. It's obvious, too, that the smart students will make sure their views match those of the biggest money-bags, I mean, philanthropists. What a pretty picture. I know the neolibs brought us to this.
    1
  45.  @LabSessionz  Looks like the algorithm is slow to decide, lol.
    1
  46. @dallasneudorf  I'm sorry to hear that, but not surprised. :/ It's sinister, because all the tech platforms know intermittent reinforcement creates behavioral addictions. On a more cheery note, something wonderful just happened: NRA v. Vullo, a victory for the First Amendment. Sotomayor for a unanimous Court. She recently wrote a concurrence in the denial of a cert petition that also had a First Amendment claim, ostensibly on the ground that the resolution of the free speech issue was obvious and didn't need the Court's elucidation. I hope people realize this case has nothing to do with the NRA as such; it's a great victory for free speech, and could foretell positive outcomes on a whole bunch of cases. Hope so, anyway.
    1
  47. Law students are "kids" now?
    1
  48. @mr.e1026  She didn't "speak her mind." She failed miserably in explaining First Amendment law and exactly how and when and where it protects free speech on campus, and when speech can be subject to discipline.
    1
  49. Fundraising. Last I heard, Stefanik had raked in 700k.
    1
  50. ​ @jh5174 Wrong. "Varify" is an entirely different word. "Verify" has the same Latin root as "vérité" and "verdad," and it pertains to truth. Varify pertains to variety.
    1
  51. ​ @michaeld7945 OP insists it's correct. Smh.
    1
  52. @jh5174  Not at all. I just have a thing for Latin-based languages. Honest. (I also support cursive, as Spanish and French speakers use it, among other reasons.)
    1