Letters to the Editor (Feb. 21)

Joe Clement, Wichita Falls

Birdbrained ideas

I was so inspired by Sunday's column " cash in on our birds" that I have come up with my own bird-brained ideas to stimulate our economy.

Under Obamanomics I will apply for a massive stimulus package and quickly before another city beats us to it. Such a package will be paid for at no cost to our citizens as I will be using the government's money as was done for "Cash for Clunkers" and cash for new homes. We'll call this new program "Cash for Birds."

To make our new airport bigger, better, and unique, we'll add a few extra runways and call them "bird landings." Then we'll give each bird an offseason pass to our water park. And we'll support our local arts by having "Big Bird" Broadway shows.

We can stimulate our taxpayer mattress factory by adding a shift that builds "Bird Nest Mattresses." We can make a better offer and turn the old General into a combo hotel/hospital for birds.

Here is just an example of the thousands of jobs I will create: security to keep the poachers out; maintenance to clean bird droppings; gift shop employees; guides for bird-watching tours; and the job list is endless.

I'll also be supporting several national bird-brained ideas such as colonizing the moon or selling untold amounts of our refined oil products to China and the rest of Asia so that Americans can pay more at the pump.

After spending all day Sunday on economic thought, I now feel connected to all my fellow fine-feathered friends as we join together to brainstorm new and innovative ways to spend YOUR tax money.

------------

Russell Moore, Olney

Sorry for clinics?

How horrible that a woman has to hear a description of the development of her child and is offered a chance to hear the heartbeat, view a sonogram and wait 24 hours; she might make an informed decision and we can't have that. I'm sure in the past that the abortion clinic provided all the information needed in an impartial manner; I mean, it's not like they have an interest whether they perform an abortion or not do they? I feel so sorry for the clinics because they have had to hire a couple of more staffers to keep up with extra appointments; scheduling of the disposal of unwanted children is hard work you know.

© 2012 Times Record News. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

  • Discuss
  • Print

Comments » 42

monteb writes:

Mr. Clement, while I tend to agree with your concern about the way our tax money is being handled, writing satire may not your forte.

Creep writes:

Come on, monteb, lighten up. I too agree with Mr. Clement's concerns, but I disagree with your assessment that his satire may not be warranted. We could all use a happy chuckle now and again, and what better way than to poke at the follies of our elected officials. After all, they are only human like the rest of us, and they make occassional mistakes just like we do. Have a laugh and quit taking life so serious.....you'll live longer.

Thinkinguy writes:

in response to monteb:

Mr. Clement, while I tend to agree with your concern about the way our tax money is being handled, writing satire may not your forte.

Proof that people dsagree, I thought the satire was pretty good but he forgot to mention all the jobs he would be able to "SAVE."

Moliere writes:

Right on, Moore! Will women never learn that they need men to tell them what they can do with their bodies? Barefoot and pregnant, indeed! Next thing ya know, they will want to vote and own property.

You tell 'em, Moore

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to Moliere:

Right on, Moore! Will women never learn that they need men to tell them what they can do with their bodies? Barefoot and pregnant, indeed! Next thing ya know, they will want to vote and own property.

You tell 'em, Moore

Could it be that a rational person would find it hard to define something with a heartbeat as "tissue"?

Trapper writes:

TC, have you ever found a "rational person" that was also a liberal?

Moliere writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

Could it be that a rational person would find it hard to define something with a heartbeat as "tissue"?

You talk pretty tough when it comes to kicking women around or men with polio. Your mother must really be proud, Poindexter.

bobert writes:

I don't have the solution to the problem

However, Mr. Moore's comment is much better expressed than your pitiful response.

I prefer the saying that "It is not the things you don't know that hurt you. It is the things you are absolutely sure of which turn out to be incorrect."

Now jump back in Moliere with some name calling and a smart alec remark. Don't contribute anything with any thought given to it.

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to Trapper:

TC, have you ever found a "rational person" that was also a liberal?

On rare occasions Moliere achieves lucidity.....so I tend to believe he is not a total lost cause. I have my doubts sometimes though......I look at my grandson and I could not imagine him not being around because his (formerly Liberal) grandparents discussed with my son in law the option of abortion due to their ages. Let's just say they now see the real truth about that option.

As for picking on men with polio.....Does anyone see how Lib's play it? It's kind of like how you can't disagree with Obama's policies without being labeled a racist. Lib's always find a way to make them above reproach.

I thought you were better than that Moliere.

PoorRichard writes:

Here's one way to stimulate the economy:

Let's stop paying out the "...close to a hundred billion in checks sent out by the IRS (go) to folks who have no tax liability..."

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/...

I'd be willing to bet that might go at least a little way toward "stimulation".

Texasczech63 writes:

But then again rational people know that the only reason we are discussing abortion and birth control is because the Lame Stream Media and Obama have steered to topic to anything but the true economy and the cost of energy. The word we are looking for is deflection.

Notice how the media blamed Bush for the price of gas before....but they believe it's NEVER Obama's fault....is it?

Obama's lack of even bringing it up the topic speaks volumes.

Moliere writes:

in response to bobert:

I don't have the solution to the problem

However, Mr. Moore's comment is much better expressed than your pitiful response.

I prefer the saying that "It is not the things you don't know that hurt you. It is the things you are absolutely sure of which turn out to be incorrect."

Now jump back in Moliere with some name calling and a smart alec remark. Don't contribute anything with any thought given to it.

Bobert, have you even considered the relationship between dishing it out and taking it. You and TC talk big, but when it gets right down to the real nitty gritty, you got nothin'

Trapper writes:

I can see that this is headed once again to the lowest level of name calling, without intelligent input from the left.

Moliere writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

On rare occasions Moliere achieves lucidity.....so I tend to believe he is not a total lost cause. I have my doubts sometimes though......I look at my grandson and I could not imagine him not being around because his (formerly Liberal) grandparents discussed with my son in law the option of abortion due to their ages. Let's just say they now see the real truth about that option.

As for picking on men with polio.....Does anyone see how Lib's play it? It's kind of like how you can't disagree with Obama's policies without being labeled a racist. Lib's always find a way to make them above reproach.

I thought you were better than that Moliere.

You ARE conflicted then, re: your "formerly" liberal parents. Is this the basis of your hatred for that which does not agree with you?

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to Moliere:

You ARE conflicted then, re: your "formerly" liberal parents. Is this the basis of your hatred for that which does not agree with you?

There is absolutely no conflict what so ever Moliere.....I am AGINST the liberal rationalization of killing babies. I do not oppose the use of contraceptives and I would oppose any law to ban them. On the other hand, to force people whose religious beliefs prohibit contraception to pay for others' contraception BY LAW, is wrong. Women have and should always have access to contraception: a month's supply can be purchased at Wal-Mart for less that a pack of cigarettes, so the Obama mandate is a purposeful attack on our constitutional rights.

The Left is pretending there is a "limited access" to force their socialist agenda on the country."

The way you dodge the eugenics question is laughable.

"Frankly, I had thought at the time Roe was decided, there was concern about population growth and particularly growth in populations that we don't want to have too many of." -Justice Ginsberg.

Sadly, there is a population of America that will watch SNL and Jon Stewart for their news and this is all they hear. "Zay all make goodz little Margaut Sanger's." -Jon Stewart
and
In a segment within SNL's Weekend Update sketch called "Really with Seth and Amy" Amy Poehler and Seth Meyers addressed the Republican reaction to Obama's contraception mandate.

Not surprisingly, the issue of religious freedom or the first amendment was not part of the sketch.

REALLY!

Clearly stated in my post that I was refering to my son in laws formerly liberal parents just to clarify your misconception.

bobert writes:

Moliere,

Gosh, you called me by my name. You must be running out of insulting ones. There are many ways to find long lists of insulting and ridiculing names to call people. Some are even limited to five letters or less for those that have a tough time reading. Another way to pick up some dandies is to go to a school playground when 3rd graders are at recess and just listen. Those guys are full of them.

There are also many, many articles on why one should not resort to such juvenile tactics. I am not able to find one that encourages such behavior. Maybe you could refer me to one or two, as I do not wish to be left at the gate, if that is truly a recommended effort in correspondence.

axton writes:

in response to Trapper:

I can see that this is headed once again to the lowest level of name calling, without intelligent input from the left.

Or right!

wofum1947 writes:

I have always been of the opinion that are those issues that we as humans could and would never be able to resolve to the satisfaction of the vast majority of people. In my opinion, the issue of abortion and all things related to it is one of those polarizing issues. Once the topic is mentioned, it seems that normally sane, rational individuals "lose it", go off the deep end and begin to reflect on the intelligence and motives of members of the other side. In my opinion, when that happens, the debate about the issue degenerates into something that does absolutely nothing to further the arguments of either side. Both sides get "bent out of shape" over the inferences to lack of intelligence and so on and lose track of any semblence of logic and even semi-rational discusssion/debate. But, again, that's just my opinion and why I stay out of the "discussion" on the topic.

riceboal writes:

Joe Clement : I will agree with you that your article is filled with bird brained ideas & is mostly for the birds , but me & Newt do like your idea to colonize the moon , which would of course be impossible , but would serve the purpose of shifting money from the taxpayer into the hands of the big corporations where it belongs . I think most of the residents of Bunkerville will see that it would create a few thousand jobs which should be a good enough reason to warrant the expenditure & oh yeah , National defense !! We could make it easy to sell by just calling it National defense .

riceboal writes:

The stock market is approaching 13,000 which is the highest it has been in four years . We really need to get a republican in there to stop the trend . If this keeps up Wall Streeters will be donating to Obama . This just couldn't come at a worse time .

Texasczech63 writes:

If anyone would like to know where our President would like our healthcare to go just recall the cryptic quote..."take a look at the Netherlands if you want to reform the US healthcare"....So let's all take a look as our esteemed President suggested.

Could he be referring to Euthanasia now practiced in the Netherlands? I not talking Kevorkian (although they do that as well) style euthanasia but killing without Patient's Consent and Morphine Overdoses Intended to Terminate Life. Perhaps he be referring to the Groningen Protocol that allows government backed infanticide. This is defined as the Infant (I prefer BABY) having some functional disability or perceived potential to require long-term assistance (lack of self-sufficiency). Other factors included the inability to communicate verbally or dependence on medical care. The fact that most of these cases of infant euthanasia are not reported only confirms that the practitioners themselves know this is wrong and should be concealed.

This sort of moral philosophy from Steven Pinker at Harvard and Princeton ethicist Peter Singer and others—have long been argued that personhood is determined by qualities and abilities of the mind. By their reckoning, infants and young children are not true persons. Singer has even said "that infanticide is not immoral, because it is not the same as taking the life of a fully-developed person."

So to sacrifice particular individuals for the greater good is where Obama would like to see our country go?

I ask our resident Liberal's....how is this not eugenics?

They Liberal/progressives might view this as their UTOPIA........I just see pure evil and a blood-chilling crime against a helpless population. No amount of legal correctness will ever make this a moral decision

PoorRichard writes:

OFF TOPIC ALERT!!!

In My Opinion:
"...A suicidal veteran’s plea for help could land him in jail..."

This is so OUTRAGEOUSLY wrong! The man in charge of the federal office pursuing the charges against Duvall is Timothy Heaphy, the U.S. attorney for the Western District of Virginia. He NEEDS TO GO!

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/a...

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

The stock market is approaching 13,000 which is the highest it has been in four years . We really need to get a republican in there to stop the trend . If this keeps up Wall Streeters will be donating to Obama . This just couldn't come at a worse time .

You might want to look to history and see what normally happens right before a crash RB. Ignore the high unemployment and the cost of fuel if you like but rational people all know that they have a big factor on the economy. I predict that even Obama's cooked number of 8.3% will "surprisingly jump to over 9% next month.

We all know the real number is now 15% anyway.

The price of gas is also obvious as well.

riceboal writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

You might want to look to history and see what normally happens right before a crash RB. Ignore the high unemployment and the cost of fuel if you like but rational people all know that they have a big factor on the economy. I predict that even Obama's cooked number of 8.3% will "surprisingly jump to over 9% next month.

We all know the real number is now 15% anyway.

The price of gas is also obvious as well.

It is a remarkable ability you have to take every positive & make a negative of it . Do you suppose our constant being in a war like stance with major oil producing Nations might have something to do with the price of oil ? Wait until hip shooting Santorum gets in the saddle . You oil people will really be happy . There is no gas shortage . How many times have you been turned away from a station because of no fuel ? Refineries control the flow of oil to maintain high prices , I would guess that you know that . And , I paid over $4.00 a gallon for gas when oil man Bush was in office , so this is nothing new .. Just another talking point

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

It is a remarkable ability you have to take every positive & make a negative of it . Do you suppose our constant being in a war like stance with major oil producing Nations might have something to do with the price of oil ? Wait until hip shooting Santorum gets in the saddle . You oil people will really be happy . There is no gas shortage . How many times have you been turned away from a station because of no fuel ? Refineries control the flow of oil to maintain high prices , I would guess that you know that . And , I paid over $4.00 a gallon for gas when oil man Bush was in office , so this is nothing new .. Just another talking point

No more remarkable to than your inability to see the stupidity of Obama's energy policy.

You fail to mention that we are currently exporting this commodity to China.

Finally, once again you miss the whole point of my post simply stating that high unemployment and soaring gas prices have a negative effect on the economy.

RB...we all paid over $4.00 a gallon for gas when Bush was in office and the media screamed bloody murder about it........but now nary a mention of Obama....can you tell me what has changed? Could it be because he was a community organizer instead of a "oil man" as you put it......he gets a pass.

Trapper writes:

Am I the only one who remembers January 3, 2007???

riceboal writes:

I wonder what the military & the Government contribute to the price of fuel and/or shortage of same ? Every time the President takes one of his trips it requires two identical fuel eating aircraft plus aircraft to provide security. then you have the trips the Congress finds it necessary to take to foreign lands , then you have air force aircraft that are constantly in the air & others who seemly are in the air because they like it up there .War requires the use of a lot of fuel & it seems we are either in a war or planning our next one . It requires the sacrifice of a few thousand "grunts " but it makes billions of dollars for a few & it just happens to be the few who flood Congress with thousands of high salaried ex Congressmen & military who now serve as lobbyists .

riceboal writes:

in response to Trapper:

Am I the only one who remembers January 3, 2007???

No , but I remember January, 3 1981 . That is when I smoked my last cigarette . On January third 2007 I was at a party with several other close friends who will swear to my being there during the time in question .

riceboal writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

No more remarkable to than your inability to see the stupidity of Obama's energy policy.

You fail to mention that we are currently exporting this commodity to China.

Finally, once again you miss the whole point of my post simply stating that high unemployment and soaring gas prices have a negative effect on the economy.

RB...we all paid over $4.00 a gallon for gas when Bush was in office and the media screamed bloody murder about it........but now nary a mention of Obama....can you tell me what has changed? Could it be because he was a community organizer instead of a "oil man" as you put it......he gets a pass.

Boy hidy, you know how to cherry pick a sentence. How about the rest of my comment ? Are you saying that Bush didn't export oil ? Well he probably didn't. I think the oil companies export oil for the purpose of keeping up the price . I don't believe Obama owns an oil well or anything connected to oil . Bush was an oilman & there was a time oil men were excluded from consideration as President for that reason . I am not saying he profited , I don't know , but he could have . Where have you paid $4.00 for a gallon of gas ? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to know that high unemployment & soaring gas prices have a negative effect on the economy . That is apparent when you buy anything that has to be trucked . Diesel fuel is nearly $4.00 already . Just curious . Does your wife read what you write ?

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to Trapper:

Am I the only one who remembers January 3, 2007???

No Trap your not the only one.....the Lib's refer to it as "Bush's Fault" day.

But we know better.

riceboal writes:

The information below is outdated , but it gives an idea of the cost of maintaining our World wide military program when you add in the cost of maintaining foreign bases along with the nuclear submarines & aircraft carriers at a time when we are not in a war with a Nation . Just on terrorism & drugs .

The US Department of Defense (DoD) is the largest oil consuming government body in the US and in the world

“Military fuel consumption makes the Department of Defense the single largest consumer of petroleum in the U.S” [1]

“Military fuel consumption for aircraft, ships, ground vehicles and facilities makes the DoD the single largest consumer of petroleum in the U.S” [2]

According to the US Defense Energy Support Center Fact Book 2004, in Fiscal Year 2004, the US military fuel consumption increased to 144 million barrels. This is about 40 million barrels more than the average peacetime military usage.

By the way, 144 million barrels makes 395 000 barrels per day, almost as much as daily energy consumption of Greece.

The US military is the biggest purchaser of oil in the world.

In 1999 Almanac edition of the Defense Logistic Agency’s news magazine Dimensions it was stated that the DESC “purchases more light refined petroleum product than any other single organization or country in the world. With a $3.5 billion annual budget, DESC procures nearly 100 million barrels of petroleum products each year. That's enough fuel for 1,000 cars to drive around the world 4,620 times.”

That budget increased a lot over the years. The US DoD spent $8.2 billion on energy in fiscal year 2004.

“In fiscal 2005, DESC will buy about 128 million barrels of fuel at a cost of $8.5 billion, and Jet fuel constitutes nearly 70 percent of DoD's petroleum product purchases.” says American Forces Information Service News Article by G. J. Gilmore. [3]

For some, this is not enough though. Here is what a report from Office of Under Secretary of Defense says “Because DOD’s consumption of oil represents the highest priority of all uses, there will be no fundamental limits to DOD’s fuel supply for many, many decades.” [4]

American GI is the most energy-consuming soldier ever seen on the field of war

“The Army calculated that it would burn 40 million gallons of fuel in three weeks of combat in Iraq, an amount equivalent to the gasoline consumed by all Allied armies combined during the four years of World War I.” [1]

In May 2005 issue of The Atlantic Monthly, Robert Bryce gives another example; “The Third Army (of General Patton) had about 400,000 men and used about 400,000 gallons of gasoline a day. Today the Pentagon has about a third that number of troops in Iraq yet they use more than four times as much fuel.”

riceboal writes:

Texasczech63writes : I ask our resident Liberal's....how is this not eugenics'

I thought eugenics was the selective breeding practiced by Hitler to build a blonde haired blue eyed aryan race . I heard that really didn't work but the troops had a lot of fun with it .

riceboal writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

No Trap your not the only one.....the Lib's refer to it as "Bush's Fault" day.

But we know better.

There is a strong rumor that Californians are considering naming the San Andreas fault , the " Bush's Fault ", but I personally think that would be disrespectful of San Andreas which was not responsible for nearly as many deaths .

Moliere writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

If anyone would like to know where our President would like our healthcare to go just recall the cryptic quote..."take a look at the Netherlands if you want to reform the US healthcare"....So let's all take a look as our esteemed President suggested.

Could he be referring to Euthanasia now practiced in the Netherlands? I not talking Kevorkian (although they do that as well) style euthanasia but killing without Patient's Consent and Morphine Overdoses Intended to Terminate Life. Perhaps he be referring to the Groningen Protocol that allows government backed infanticide. This is defined as the Infant (I prefer BABY) having some functional disability or perceived potential to require long-term assistance (lack of self-sufficiency). Other factors included the inability to communicate verbally or dependence on medical care. The fact that most of these cases of infant euthanasia are not reported only confirms that the practitioners themselves know this is wrong and should be concealed.

This sort of moral philosophy from Steven Pinker at Harvard and Princeton ethicist Peter Singer and others—have long been argued that personhood is determined by qualities and abilities of the mind. By their reckoning, infants and young children are not true persons. Singer has even said "that infanticide is not immoral, because it is not the same as taking the life of a fully-developed person."

So to sacrifice particular individuals for the greater good is where Obama would like to see our country go?

I ask our resident Liberal's....how is this not eugenics?

They Liberal/progressives might view this as their UTOPIA........I just see pure evil and a blood-chilling crime against a helpless population. No amount of legal correctness will ever make this a moral decision

I've been worried about the youth in Asia for a long time. Now I worry more about the sanity of some of my fellow posters.

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

Boy hidy, you know how to cherry pick a sentence. How about the rest of my comment ? Are you saying that Bush didn't export oil ? Well he probably didn't. I think the oil companies export oil for the purpose of keeping up the price . I don't believe Obama owns an oil well or anything connected to oil . Bush was an oilman & there was a time oil men were excluded from consideration as President for that reason . I am not saying he profited , I don't know , but he could have . Where have you paid $4.00 for a gallon of gas ? You don't have to be a brain surgeon to know that high unemployment & soaring gas prices have a negative effect on the economy . That is apparent when you buy anything that has to be trucked . Diesel fuel is nearly $4.00 already . Just curious . Does your wife read what you write ?

Your lack of comprehension is about as I expected. Now re-read my post poindexter and you see how I referenced to YOUR statement about 4 dollar gas and how the Libtard media screamed about it then and how the libtard media does not mention it at all in reference to Obama....hence the pass comment.

Congress has never imposed outright bans on oil exports but made it extremely difficult to do...that is until 2009 when for some reason the Lib controlled congress saw fit to ease the difficulties of exporting.

therefore we get:

"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," "Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."-Barrack
Obama

Well Consumers.....it looks like this is a promise he intends to keep.....no matter who it hurts.

And yes my wife does read this on occasion.....but only to laugh at the gesticulations that some feel the need to go thru in order to dodge or deflect direct questions.

Moliere writes:

in response to Texasczech63:

Your lack of comprehension is about as I expected. Now re-read my post poindexter and you see how I referenced to YOUR statement about 4 dollar gas and how the Libtard media screamed about it then and how the libtard media does not mention it at all in reference to Obama....hence the pass comment.

Congress has never imposed outright bans on oil exports but made it extremely difficult to do...that is until 2009 when for some reason the Lib controlled congress saw fit to ease the difficulties of exporting.

therefore we get:

"Under my plan of a cap-and-trade system, electricity rates would necessarily skyrocket," "Coal-powered plants, you know, natural gas, you name it, whatever the plants were, whatever the industry was, they would have to retrofit their operations. That will cost money. They will pass that money on to consumers."-Barrack
Obama

Well Consumers.....it looks like this is a promise he intends to keep.....no matter who it hurts.

And yes my wife does read this on occasion.....but only to laugh at the gesticulations that some feel the need to go thru in order to dodge or deflect direct questions.

My mom told me not to gesticulate, that it would stunt my growth. How 'bout yours, TC?

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to Moliere:

My mom told me not to gesticulate, that it would stunt my growth. How 'bout yours, TC?

Had to look that word up....huh RB?

Don't want you to throw your old hip out....I hear HHS has been looking into Euthanasia.

riceboal writes:

Well, enough of this . It seems that the Mayor of Bunkerville can comprehend what he writes , but cannot do so for what he reads . I gotta go , I have a lot of gesticulating I need to catch up on ...Have fun .

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

Well, enough of this . It seems that the Mayor of Bunkerville can comprehend what he writes , but cannot do so for what he reads . I gotta go , I have a lot of gesticulating I need to catch up on ...Have fun .

Your attempts at insults are so childlike they are actually funny RB.

The 34 year old TV show references are a hoot by cracky.

FAIL

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

Texasczech63writes : I ask our resident Liberal's....how is this not eugenics'

I thought eugenics was the selective breeding practiced by Hitler to build a blonde haired blue eyed aryan race . I heard that really didn't work but the troops had a lot of fun with it .

Doesn't it ever bother you that your wrong on just about everything you think?

The fact that the Lib's dodge the question should tell the truth about eugenics.

Margaret Sanger the founder of PPH said once "The most merciful thing that a large family does to one of its infant members is to kill it."

Agreeing with her are many noted Liberal's such John Maynard Keynes and Fabian Socialists George Bernard Shaw and H.G. Wells and even American Inventor Alexander Graham Bell were all leading eugenicists. They will try to deflect the fact that in the late 30's ( yep FDR ) in the US about half the states had eugenics and forced sterilization laws and that the California laws specifically were used as a model for eugenics laws in Nazi Germany.

FAIL #2 RB

riceboal writes:

Merriam Webster : Eugenics noun : A science dealing with the improvement ( as by selective breeding ) of hereditary qualities esp. of human beings .

If this doesn't describe what the Nazi's were attempting there's not a Texan in the Lone Star State .

Texasczech63 writes:

in response to riceboal:

Merriam Webster : Eugenics noun : A science dealing with the improvement ( as by selective breeding ) of hereditary qualities esp. of human beings .

If this doesn't describe what the Nazi's were attempting there's not a Texan in the Lone Star State .

Keep on deflecting the truth lib.

FAIL #3

Want to participate in the conversation? Become a subscriber today. Subscribers can read and comment on any story, anytime. Non-subscribers will only be able to view comments on select stories.

Features