runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:46 am
Who is Ben Affleck?
Did Ben ask to see anyones college transcripts too?
An entertainment personality like Dump was...
OH.....I know him......the guys that thinks women should pray seperately from men. that supports sharia law. that guy. Isn't he a wife cheater? Just like tRump?
infotainment indeed.
I don’t know those things but it would not surprise me... Like I said, you follow these clowns more than I do....
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:46 am
Who is Ben Affleck?
Did Ben ask to see anyones college transcripts too?
An entertainment personality like Dump was...
OH.....I know him......the guys that thinks women should pray seperately from men. that supports sharia law. that guy. Isn't he a wife cheater? Just like tRump?
infotainment indeed.
I don’t know those things but it would not surprise me... Like I said, you follow these clowns more than I do....
ANd yet.....you have about 700 more posts than I do.
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:46 am
Who is Ben Affleck?
Did Ben ask to see anyones college transcripts too?
An entertainment personality like Dump was...
OH.....I know him......the guys that thinks women should pray seperately from men. that supports sharia law. that guy. Isn't he a wife cheater? Just like tRump?
infotainment indeed.
I don’t know those things but it would not surprise me... Like I said, you follow these clowns more than I do....
ANd yet.....you have about 700 more posts than I do.
Yes. But was does that have to do with following more of these clowns? Take a look at how many times I initiate someone's name versus responding to some ridiculous comment or comparison or characterization. You will notice a pattern.
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 1:41 pmWill have to watch his entire interview, but he seems to be confirming that Deep State plotters were considering a coup d'etat, via their investigative powers.
A remarkable fiction that is real only in the fevered minds of the Always Trumpers and authoritarian, anti-American purists that feel it's OK to attack, demean and attempt to disable and marginalize the American Intelligence Services. Why it's so hard to believe these career professionals when they say they had LEGITIMATE concerns about the president's activities, statements and entanglements is jaw-dropping to say the least. Except that we've been getting fed this drivel here at FL for many moons now.
Donald Trump has spent his adult life running from, attacking, deflecting, vilifying and ducking for cover from law enforcement. He's been entangled in more legal fights, and lost a considerable number of them...
Based on your criteria for initiating investigations, they better be investigating the newest Congressperson from MN as a potential suicide bomber.
More silliness. Getting increasingly hard to take anything you say seriously, Salty.
I happen to be pretty concerned about anti-Semitic tropes and how insidious they are, but let's not treat such as a political punching bag. In this case, she's certainly apologized and is getting quite a bit of an education on the topic. Hopefully she'll actually dig in and learn and grow. She's young, I'll give her a chance...but she's definitely on notice that any form of such prejudice is going to get challenged.
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:46 am
Who is Ben Affleck?
Did Ben ask to see anyones college transcripts too?
An entertainment personality like Dump was...
OH.....I know him......the guys that thinks women should pray seperately from men. that supports sharia law. that guy. Isn't he a wife cheater? Just like tRump?
infotainment indeed.
I don’t know those things but it would not surprise me... Like I said, you follow these clowns more than I do....
ANd yet.....you have about 700 more posts than I do.
Yes. But was does that have to do with following more of these clowns? Take a look at how many times I initiate someone's name versus responding to some ridiculous comment or comparison or characterization. You will notice a pattern.
The only pattern is pretend sardonic posts , but ONLY towards pretend CONservative types. Not really having a point when posting Obama, FerryCon, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, TUCC, racism and Rev. Wrong........smoking weed and doing cocaine (still HIGHly illegal, btw )
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
runrussellrun wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 9:46 am
Who is Ben Affleck?
Did Ben ask to see anyones college transcripts too?
An entertainment personality like Dump was...
OH.....I know him......the guys that thinks women should pray seperately from men. that supports sharia law. that guy. Isn't he a wife cheater? Just like tRump?
infotainment indeed.
I don’t know those things but it would not surprise me... Like I said, you follow these clowns more than I do....
ANd yet.....you have about 700 more posts than I do.
Yes. But was does that have to do with following more of these clowns? Take a look at how many times I initiate someone's name versus responding to some ridiculous comment or comparison or characterization. You will notice a pattern.
The only pattern is pretend sardonic posts , but ONLY towards pretend CONservative types. Not really having a point when posting Obama, FerryCon, Bill Ayers, Tony Rezko, TUCC, racism and Rev. Wrong........smoking weed and doing cocaine (still HIGHly illegal, btw )
Because the rationale is absurd...... I find it humorous..... You admit you area CONservative type my friend?
old salt wrote: ↑Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:32 pm
They would have needed to have probable cause to spy on the President. ...I should say -- spy even more invasively.
How long had Crossfire Hurricane been going by then ?
You'd think our premier spy catchers would have learned something after getting burned by swallowing Steele's dossier, hook, line & sinker.
Lindsay is all over it. He should hunt for all the witches he can....
It was an act of desperation. They had used the powers of their offices to ensure HRC remained a viable candidate, then used Fusion's Russian disinformation, in an attempt to prevent Trump from being elected. They failed. They feared they'd be discovered & needed an insurance policy (read their texts). So they considered the option of spying on a sitting President & then misusing the 25th Amendment (rather than impeachment -- which they knew would fail). Now they'll have a chance to rationalize their abuses of the powers of their offices, ...under oath.
If you wanna classify me.....would have to go with philosophical pragmatist, wrapped up in strong atheist beliefs and hints of grapefruit, clove and anarchy,
ILM...Independent Lives Matter
Pronouns: "we" and "suck"
So, not to distract from other fascinating topics, but anyone else mildly interested to read Mueller's sentencing memo in the Manafort case(s), expected to drop today? I think it may be rather salty (with no offense intended to OldRandy).
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
Chips O'Toole wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:59 pm
So, not to distract from other fascinating topics, but anyone else mildly interested to read Mueller's sentencing memo in the Manafort case(s), expected to drop today? I think it may be rather salty (with no offense intended to OldRandy).
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
there you libs go again living in a bubble.
Try reading the Israel and Zionism thred on this very forum. You know the one. The one where you can't see any liberal anti semitic bias.
Chips O'Toole wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 1:59 pm
So, not to distract from other fascinating topics, but anyone else mildly interested to read Mueller's sentencing memo in the Manafort case(s), expected to drop today? I think it may be rather salty (with no offense intended to OldRandy).
It may well reveal a bit more.
I'm sure it's eagerly awaited. Given McCabe's interviews (& frantic walkbacks), there's a desperate need within the MSM to change the subject & generate more audience friendly [BREAKING NEWS]. Will it foreshadow the forthcoming big blanket conspiracy indictment ?
I sure hope McCabe sells a lot of books. He's gonna need the $$$ for his legal defense fund. You should volunteer your services Chips.
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
there you libs go again living in a bubble.
Try reading the Israel and Zionism thred on this very forum. You know the one. The one where you can't see any liberal anti semitic bias.
Am I a "lib" now???
I guess from the perspective of someone on the hard, hard right, maybe I do look like a liberal...
I've participated pretty actively on that thread and I don't see much anti-semitic bias on there, except from a couple of hard-rightward leaning types. Some pretty nuanced discussion on there, actually.
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
tertiary........I was discussing with you.
first.......most of your Congressional districts residents can shirley make the same "know thy name" claim
second.....article 1, sect. 2. To me, you can't have more than one House Rep, per a very specific number. (30K ) Meaning, you can't have 2 or 3 for every thirty thousand. regardless, why include the number if it is of no import? Or, the 1st of firsts....why bother proposing it and that number in the first place.
Curious as to why you probably agree, that ratio's that are low, are good. Dartmouth wasIS inferior to Maryland because it had/has a much smaller ratio for Econ 101. Or MIAA HIGH school choice is NOT based on a low ratio? You prefer the HIGHer ratio, of say, one teacher/coach/camp councillor, per, gee...I don't know, the ratio of most congressional districts. 1 to 700,000.
Why do you NOT value the low ratio theory when it comes to providing better service, better experiences, better societal benefits? Seems contradictory to lifes choices, eh?
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
there you libs go again living in a bubble.
Try reading the Israel and Zionism thred on this very forum. You know the one. The one where you can't see any liberal anti semitic bias.
MDlaxfan76 is not a liberal. He is a long time right of center, moderate republican (don't know if he still considers himself a republican after the advent of Trump). He also has basic reading and writing skills, unlike some calling themselves republicans.
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
there you libs go again living in a bubble.
Try reading the Israel and Zionism thred on this very forum. You know the one. The one where you can't see any liberal anti semitic bias.
Old Salt cracked the first joke about the congresswoman being a possible suicide bomber. I just joined in on the fun.
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
there you libs go again living in a bubble.
Try reading the Israel and Zionism thred on this very forum. You know the one. The one where you can't see any liberal anti semitic bias.
MDlaxfan76 is not a liberal. He is a long time right of center, moderate republican (don't know if he still considers himself a republican after the advent of Trump). He also has basic reading and writing skills, unlike some calling themselves republicans.
Not to say anything negative about MD there Mr 72 but aren't you the same person who told us over and over and over that BHO was actually a center right politician. Credibility is seen flying right out the window. I know MD has stated over and over what his political beliefs are. He has done so in the very same manner I have stated that I am not and never have been a member of the Republican party. I will admit that the opinions that MD opines about don't seem to be very closely related to the Republicans that I know. I take him at his word that he is who he says he is. In my case, I was very early on a registered Democrat. That was and still is the party that my family has most closely related to. As I write this the framed picture I bought for my mom many years ago is right above my head. The words use to mean something if you were an American of any political persuasion.
Bear with me now people because in America 2019 these are antiquated and irrelevant words spoken by a Democrat POTUS long ago. They went something like this... Ask not what your country can do for you... ask what you can do for your country. There is a second passage... also irrelevant and obsolete in America today, it is not spoken of very often... My fellow citizens of the world. Ask not what America will do for you, but what together we can do for the freedom of man. Such beautiful language spoken by President Kennedy. It is sad indeed that they mean nothing anymore in America today. In America today it is about Democrats, Republicans, Liberals, Conservatives and even our fellow Socialists trying to rip each others throats out because everybody believes that their position and philosophy of government is the only correct option available. Since no one party can be all right and no one party can be all wrong whatever happened to compromise and the understanding that no one can get everything they want so you meet in the middle? Somewhere along the road our nations political parties adopted the notion of my way or the highway. That sure is working out mighty fine for the country right now.
We don't make mistakes, we have happy accidents.
Bob Ross:
Congress will let anyone in! And I thought the White House was lax in their effort to perform background checks! Congress just let this lady in! What’s next? Farrakhan will be Senate Minority leader if we ain’t careful!
What background checks? You just can't champion that we elect many types of people. Imagine, as the founders intended, we had the 1 for 30K US House of reps and the types we would get elected. That way, you actually might get to meet with your Congressperson, 1 on 1.
Go ahead and try to meet with your CongressPerson.
What I do find disturbing is your support of all these anti-Semites. FerryCon, Omar, suicide bombers, AOC, Billy Graham, McLame, etc.
I'm going to (mostly) ignore the crack about supporting anti-Semites, as I think that's quite the false flag. Maybe some of the right wingers on this forum have some anti-Semitic biases, but I haven't seen any such evidence from the lefties, much less those on either side of the moderate spectrum. This particular young gal is getting her well earned opprobrium, primarily from her own party, and she's hopefully receiving some needed education on the topic that will help her in the future. Surely, folks will be watching.
I see my Congressman several times a year. And he knows my name. I've never given him a nickel but I have voted for him though we're of opposing parties. If I wanted to meet with him 1:1, versus just saying hello, it would be simple to accomplish.
More importantly, you keep repeating this tripe about the intentions of the Founders, but you get it exactly wrong. The 30k population # was a not to be less than #. It was a minimum not a maximum. The language is as clear as the nose on your face, yet you keep misrepresenting it. Puzzling.
tertiary........I was discussing with you.
first.......most of your Congressional districts residents can shirley make the same "know thy name" claim
second.....article 1, sect. 2. To me, you can't have more than one House Rep, per a very specific number. (30K ) Meaning, you can't have 2 or 3 for every thirty thousand. regardless, why include the number if it is of no import? Or, the 1st of firsts....why bother proposing it and that number in the first place.
Curious as to why you probably agree, that ratio's that are low, are good. Dartmouth wasIS inferior to Maryland because it had/has a much smaller ratio for Econ 101. Or MIAA HIGH school choice is NOT based on a low ratio? You prefer the HIGHer ratio, of say, one teacher/coach/camp councillor, per, gee...I don't know, the ratio of most congressional districts. 1 to 700,000.
Why do you NOT value the low ratio theory when it comes to providing better service, better experiences, better societal benefits? Seems contradictory to lifes choices, eh?
. A low student-teacher ratio fosters positive relationships, thereby
Does Dartmouths 7 to 1 student/teacher ratio mean a good school, or bad?
The Constitution is super clear on this point, and it's obvious that the intent was to not allow too many Reps relative to population, not the other way around. There were a few specific exceptions, because those States were small.
The Number of Representatives shall not exceed one for every thirty Thousand, but each State shall have at Least one Representative; and until such enumeration shall be made, the State of New Hampshire shall be entitled to chuse three, Massachusetts eight, Rhode-Island and Providence Plantations one, Connecticut five, New-York six, New Jersey four, Pennsylvania eight, Delaware one, Maryland six, Virginia ten, North Carolina five, South Carolina five, and Georgia three.
As to my Congressman, John Sarbanes, knowing my name, of course he doesn't know everyone he represents! I happen to know him through a whole variety of connections including same high school and I'm on a Board with him. I also know his dad through mutual friends. It's "Smalltimore" after all.
But you were suggesting that it's difficult to meet with a Congress person. It really isn't. But sure, you do need to make the effort and need to be vetted. My son worked for Delaware's sole Congressman (they have 2 Senators, but just one Rep) before he became Delaware's current Governor, John Carney. Small world, he got the job without the Congressman realizing that my son was related to me. Apparently all he knew was that a kid who'd interviewed with his CoS had made a good impression and had been hired. The former Congressman and I played ball together at Dartmouth, so when he officially met my son, and was told my son had played lacrosse, he realized the connection, and said, 'Wait a minute', grabbing my son hard around the shoulder, 'you went to Harvard!" Arch-rival, of course. Part of my son's job was constituent services, so to get to the Congressman you'd go through him, but that wasn't actually that difficult if you had a legitimate thing to address with the Congressman. I've also never had any great difficulty meeting with Maryland's Senators. Again, I'm not a big shot nor a donor, nor anything else like that. Just active in business and the community.
On your points about class sizes, etc, sure, I think there are virtues in small versus big. I valued that in my education and that of my family, though I wouldn't go so far as to say that it was the only factor. There were certainly smaller schools, with lower student:teacher ratios, that I wouldn't consider to be 'better', at least for my family's needs. Some scale, for instance, is necessary to support the sort of athlete experience that we were capable of competing within, so a much smaller school probably wouldn't have been as good for that side.
My family has been pretty darn blessed in its educational opportunities. My wife grew up in a small town on the Cape, Woods Hole, that had lots of scientists, so the local public HS was terrific. Daughter of a commercial fisherman and nurse, she was valedictorian and went on to Dartmouth and Harvard Business School. My dad was a poor kid who went to McDonogh and then UVA, my mom to Garrison Forest, then Wheaton, married my dad and later finished college with honors at Hopkins, taught at Garrison. sister and two nieces went to Garrison, sister to Wheaton where she was President of school and captain of two teams. Daughters went to Washington & Lee and UVA, one just finished at Bloomberg (Hopkins) the other did a grad year at UVA, son to Loyola Blakefield (his dad's alma mater) and Ole' Miss. I went to Gilman, Dartmouth, then B-School at Boston College. Son to Gilman and Harvard. Tons of opportunity, thankfully.
I'd also say that with technology today, the forward thinking educational institutions...and for that matter politicians...are recognizing that they can reach far more people, with greater personalization of attention, than they previously were able to do. For instance, my Congressman is constantly running telephonic and online 'town halls' as well as the less frequent in-person events. These enable lots of participation and direct communication.
Maybe your Congress person isn't doing his or her best to reach out, but do remember that you need to be pretty cogent, and come across rationally, when you communicate with them or they'll move on to some who is...
In the meantime, try getting to know your local town counsel, or your State legislators. There's lots of them and they're closer to the ground. That's why we've got levels of government. Lots of representation. Lots of opportunity.
