rehmwa

30% of GOP voters support bombing Agrabah. http://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/482331/Republicans-want-to-bomb-Agrabah Suspect if you polled Dems you get similar results It's like women signing petitions to end women's suffrage. Or going into the street and asking simple questions like 'how many justices are on the supreme court' I do think that if this article resonates with people, then those same people should not get their panties in a bunch when someone uses the term "Far left" to describe the fanatics on the other side. I have no issue with the term "ridiculous outlyers" to describe both groups and avoid terming either in terms of right or left at this point unless I'm specifically trying to wallow in a negative caricature I'm trying to extend to a larger group. (i.e., I wouldn't try to equate Lawrocket with Chuteless no more than I'd accuse Wendy of being a copy of Funjumper) What I'd really like to see is what would happen if it was just Trump and 1 other GOP candidate. I'd like to know what resonates on the right when the fringies are skimmed off for Trump and the rest get to drive a candidate's positions... Actually, I'd like to see that from the Dems too. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I hate to continue your divert to guns, but your point is really well made. Most pro-gun arguments, IMHO, are simply covered under the right to purchase and own what we like without government interference (if we aren't felons and have proved by our actions that we can't have nice things). NOT the 2nd at all. The 2nd amendment (specifically in the constitution) is more specifically about the ability to defend ourselves from a corrupt government and not just 'guns guns guns'. This goes a lot further and into areas a lot more broad than just unrestricted (for non-felons) private gun ownership. Though it should include it. The 2 things are very different with very different goals and justifications - though both should be taken very seriously. examples: - 1: "I have the right to protect myself as I see fit from criminals"--- TRUE - 2: "The 2nd amendment says I have the right to protect myself as I see fit from criminals"--- FALSE - 3: "The 2nd amendment says I have the right to be able to protect myself and society from a government gone bad - including owning weapons as I see fit"--- TRUE - 4: "I have the right to own stuff and I'm not convicted of actions that would restrict that right. And I don't have to justify why I want or choose to own certain things." TRUE - 5: "I can go hunting" TRUE - 6: "2nd amendment means I can go hunting" FALSE But I hate it when someone talks about the personal side (#1 and #4 and #5) (ownership and use of stuff, and individual self protection) and then claims it's a 2nd amendment discussion - those two things aren't #3 - other than protection from a bad government. It dilutes the discussion dramatically and idiots on both sides try to talk about hunting or the like. There are areas that overlap, of course, in that the 2nd amendment should actively direct opposition to anything that could lead to confiscation or abuse of the private ownership area, but that's about it to me. It's why I'd oppose registration and tracking of specific firearms, but not training and licensing and background checks (to ensure one is not a felon) of individuals to be able to purchase whatever they like. One thing that's very clear is that ALL the original rights (not FDRs welfare rights that are actually abuse of rights) are all about the same thing - listing those things that are useful to keep a government from going bad, or opposing it if goes bad anyway. The listed rights are about the gov relation with the citizens and the gov needs to work to protect the people from itself. Unlisted rights are more about citizens not being bullies to other citizens..... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I understand your point. I do believe, though, that if this stuff was direct and personal, a cultural change would be faster, and more natural, and more extensive ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Advice - It's really just a good idea to skip the 4 candidates that get to do the pre-debate debate it messes with you I watched 4 minutes of it and all four were arguing over which one cared the least about personal rights in the pursuit of protecting the public from big bad guns....(sorry, I meant terrorists - the dialogue and speeches and fearmongering are so identical it's hard to tell the difference at times). I have no idea why they have the group of 4 - frankly, the group of 10 should already be reduced to just a handful by now anyway... I only saw the last few minutes of the group of 10, apparently by then they were playing well together and I missed the fireworks - can't comment Attached - Here's our voting booth Next Nov - Vote for Free: (either Hillary or Bernie, vs Donald or the other guy) Or, take the 3rd option for 25 cents. ---------------- I suspect we'll make a big dent in the debt. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

2 scenarios: 1 - the group hijacking the logo intends to do similar charity work. Don't sue, or join forces 2 - the group hijacking the logo intends to purposely get people to donate to them instead of WW as a scam to steal that money and not help anyone. - sue the heck out of them I guess it's shameful depending on the intent of the hijackers... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

first quote - I revised to match my intent "each decided to help", surprised I have to spell that one out. my bad I don't see how finding someone in need and helping them face to face is some sort of idealism. Seems to be more reality than sending a cheque off in the mail and hoping something tangible really happens with it. If you help someone they get helped. If you do it indirectly it might....or it might not help. We'll have to disagree on what you consider reality. I don't much care, if I go help someone directly, and you send a check to some faceless organization, the net effect is still better than all talk/no action social warriors accomplish in a month of Facebook rants. as for your tangent - if gold coins fell from the sky, I think we'd all need pretty good hats. (other than this,,, My intent wasn't snarky, sorry you took it that way. My intent at the end was just humor, which I completely failed at as normal...no surprises there) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'm just one guy, I'm good with it. If just 10,000 guys decided to each help one person, then we'd help 10,000 persons. Instead of 10,000 people complaining that 'someone' (except them) 'should fix this problem' Still, writing a cheque is still better than doing nothing. Doing nothing is still better than just bitching about it like a social warrior and hoping someone else does it. I think spelling it "cheque" is actually pretty cool and much closer to "cheese" than the other version. Since cheese is also good, then it's makes it even more special. My Heirarchy of sincerity: 1 - Going out and helping someone face to face 2 - writing a check and shutting up 3 - writing a check and talking about it 4 - doing nothing 5 - "raising awareness" on a social site and nothing else 6 - forcing government to force others to do it for you 7 - stealing from the blind guy's cup ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Someone wants to ask for help or voluntary donations for a charitable cause......whether I agree or not, or contribute or not, no matter what the cause, I'm ok with them asking. If they were proposing legislation to force me to pay - whether I agree or not, would have contributed otherwise or not, no matter what the cause, that's a different story so, no, the request is not wrong if you want a new topic (actually an old worn out topic) to discuss why someone else (the countries protected, the corporations that might have profited, etc etc etc) should be legally or ethically responsible for the costs, that's a good topic, but not related to others having a choice whether or not to contribute to any cause on a voluntary basis Edit: personally? If I wanted to help a wounded warrior, I'd like go volunteer and find one locally and help them directly. I find it more genuine than mailing off a check and patting myself on the back. Just think if everyone that talked about this stuff just went and did it directly instead of using a middle man. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

How about: Show ID to buy a gun....show ID to vote. What could be more fair? With the corollary: "One person, only one vote. One person, only one gun". Fair? Why not. You get to vote twice a year, you get to purchase firearms twice a year. and in Chicago, your dead uncles can also buy you a gun 3 or 4 times a year ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Haven't you been paying attention? It's Obama's fault. either that, or Halliburton, or assault rifles whichever ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

That's been a long time I'd totally fail if I tried right now without preparation. Nice one though. No worries that your students will get a copy of it? anyway - here goes 1 - Ekwality 2 - gender equality 3 - tolerance 4 - 7.32 picoJoules per Newton meter 5 - social justice 6 - white privilege (Actually, I think it would have been a real privilege to have taken your class back when - but it's less fun to say that and ruin a good Speaker's Corner thread) Edit: I actually read the quiz - I have team members that live this stuff. Guys and girls - school really does have real world applications...... I absolutely love that you provided Avogadro’s constant to students in a 400/500 level class.... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

here's one ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I'm not going to look those up. The idea of a philosophy that prefers someone mean that just happens to be in the club over someone decent that isn't...... Indicates that this club is about growing it's ranks and influence - NOT about morality and kindness Just as well join a union, or a political party..... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

so....it's all a joke, one big joke here is a documentary of a real modern classroom, I don't know if Michael Moore did it, or perhaps some new age group, or if any ducks were abused or disrespected during the filming. (I know, I already posted it elsewhere). Perhaps you'd see the pilot program in Kallend's class, I don't know. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iKcWu0tsiZM here's another https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XM-HJT8_esM and there's another where they mock both typical Left and Right wing opinion shows that's just a bit to close to reality for comfort ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

^^ another good post that mirrors what Wendy was speaking to - all great consideration in assessing performance. none of it really advocated quotas or race too. but it's a tough question - hopefully the criteria is about 'individual' performance in terms of what they've done and the potential shown. I think one inference is that overcoming a more difficult situation is worth bonus points. That works if it's a personal assessment. - if it's a broad brush type of bonus or penalty (racist, sexist, etc) then I still think it does a disservice to individuals. Yeah, I know - treating individuals equally, not demographics equally is a common theme of mine. I try to stay true to it. rich kids taking prep classes - interesting part where doing more to be ready for college is considered a drawback instead of bonus - I don't really get that point other than an 'it's not 'fair'' type of script. Fair is subjective - preparations tangible. (Now, it would be wrong if Bubba John's little boy is excluded from a prep school that he can pay for just because little Billy Bob has to forego a little dentistry to afford it - that's where a real individual bias would be - change the names and bigotry in the example in any way) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Wendy for the win - again. nice post ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I think that's true for short term thinking, but not long term thinking. Tough balancing act IMO, hard to fully buy-in on either even with the best of intentions, you have to worry about the negative effects of going in full on either philosophy. and it's worse when the 'corrective' mechanisms actually aggravate the problem yet continue to be pushed... ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

the "fair" answer is clear - fight like hell whenever someone is treated different (denied or accepted) for ANY reason other than individual performance. no negative prejudice AND no special considerations Did you know that it's now a new definition of racism to try to sincerely live and espouse a color-blind philosophy? what do people think of that? (given - when someone 'poses' as color blind (insincere) to be a jerk or callous is a totally different thing) edit: also "diversity" is incredibly important. Diversity of thought, diversity of experience, etc etc. But that doesn't mean diversity of pointless cosmetic genetics. Ideas and thought are the true diversity. IMHO. Seems the trend is to emphasize shallow diversity and stifle diverse thinking and opinions. Is that a win? is that the vision? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I think you're handedness is weird. But the traditional stereotype is still on the other guys..... IMHO: Borrow and spend (right stereotype) is using someone else's money Tax and spend (left stereotype) is also using someone else's money Tax and borrow and spend (reality for both) is also using someone else's money I'd accept "You're talking more like a career politician all the time" edit: Trump did call the Coyote's that did the human trafficing rapists - not all Mexicans - that was another constructed media thing. He says such stupid things all the time, why dilute it with the false stuff? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

WINNER what's wrong with admissions being based on performance only, regardless of race? these would seem to go hand in hand ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Not surprised - and holy water leaves burn marks on him (At least Chuteless has something to look forward to) but it melts Hillary leaving only her pointy hat we are doomed ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

So now I'm confused: Can Donald Trump be French AND "White ISIS" (WhISIS)? http://www.newsweek.com/france-could-ban-public-wi-fi-and-anonymous-browser-tor-response-paris-attacks-402530 ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

If Gates has been covertly 'radicalized' that could really backfire as a strategy. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

signposts/symptoms - certainly. maybe go into the social inputs that have caused this push too I suspect. Thanks, I only focused on the political marketing and cultural/social manipulation of the last couple decades and how it's natural that policy, programs, and presentation would move us this way. your list supplements with market/social indicators etc - more of a passive effect rather than mis-guided calculated effort. I wonder more about which is cause vs effect, is it a natural evolution? or did we do it to ourselves? Maybe it's just old man "get off my lawn" fiction too, I don't know.... I might try to find the book - Does it discuss objectively enough? or do you think it would appeal to the excessively left or right types? ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

I think you're important, man. (chest bump) But your 2nd sentence shows you still refuse to even try to acknowledge my point. Last try - It's not about the details of Trumps crappy positions which I agree with you. It's about the fact that more and more people on any and all topics come across and treat others like Funjumper does and fewer and fewer come across like Wendy. I think that's a huge part of the problem. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants