Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "The Hill"
channel.
-
950
-
848
-
431
-
425
-
372
-
362
-
360
-
312
-
305
-
248
-
202
-
187
-
185
-
183
-
181
-
174
-
170
-
162
-
157
-
140
-
132
-
129
-
128
-
128
-
128
-
118
-
113
-
111
-
111
-
110
-
109
-
109
-
102
-
93
-
92
-
90
-
88
-
82
-
81
-
79
-
73
-
72
-
68
-
68
-
66
-
65
-
62
-
61
-
58
-
58
-
57
-
56
-
55
-
54
-
52
-
52
-
52
-
50
-
50
-
50
-
49
-
49
-
49
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
48
-
47
-
47
-
46
-
46
-
46
-
45
-
45
-
45
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
44
-
43
-
43
-
42
-
42
-
42
-
41
-
41
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
40
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
39
-
38
-
37
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
36
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
35
-
34
-
34
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
33
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
32
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
31
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
30
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
29
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
28
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
26
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
25
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
24
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
22
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
21
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
20
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
19
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
18
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
17
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
THIS is what's disturbing.
We've been lied to so much, and systematically, and by now, everyone must know it. If your friend had actually watched the video or read a complete transcript, and come away feeling uneasy, thinking it could be antisemitic, all on their very own, without hearing someone else say it first, then there is a simple disagreement about interpreting facts we have in common.
This, on the other hand, is sinister.
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
@patriciacampbell6443 Really? One of my closest friends who always votes Republican and who practices marksmanship tried to get me to take the vaccine.
Now she is sorry she got vaccinated. She did it for her elderly dad, thinking she was protecting him. If my dad had been alive, it probably would have tipped the balance for me as well.
I am far left, by the way. In other countries, the left opposed the mandates. In France the left made it illegal to so much as ask a minor if they were vaccinated, much less to try to force them to take it. After that, no one was asked anymore.
Never follow just American health advice. If Switzerland, Norway, Denmark, Germany, France, etc., aren't doing it -- don't do it. Whatever "it" is!
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
@gdiwolverinemale2745 I didn't say it was a linear relationship, and it is obvious that it couldn't be. But nice try.
I thought everyone knew about things like marginal value, diminishing returns, etc., which characterize economics. You know, optimization problems; Economics 101.
Re: "national balance sheets" We've had about 40 years of reducing taxes on capital, which has then purchased government bonds and become the government's creditor -- instead of paying taxes, they collect interest on the national debt. In the meantime, industry, farming, and fishing are gutted while the service sector grows. Laws which prohibited banks backed by the government from taking certain risks in highly volatile securities markets have been repealed. Gee. What could go wrong? Oh, I don't know. It should be a blast to find out.
In the meantime, go after seniors. BTW, do you have any familiarity with France? When people get their pension, which secures their basic needs, come what may, they don't usually retire. They very often open their own shop. Sometimes they even paint, or write.
Did you ever wonder why you have to say "bonjour madame, bonjour monsieur" when you walk into a boutique? It's not owned by some conglomerate, it's that older person's joint.
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
12
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
@jamesmorrow1646 What vaccines are EUA, developed in a year, contain nanoparticles, and required four shots in under 18 months? None before these.
If Medication A has sufficient characteristics of a vaccine to be called a vaccine, it does not mean that it shares all the other, positive characteristics of other vaccines. Hence it makes no sense to say "vaccines save lives," AND ascribe that characteristic to this new medication. Whether, on balance, IT saves lives, AND has an acceptable risk profile for all age groups for which is has been prescribed, is precisely what is at issue. This is to be proved, not assumed. Precautionary Principle 101.
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
@otomicans6580 The DNC is now an elitist, corporatist neoliberal party. It does a lot of window dressing, but never stands against Wall Street deregulation, an ever-growing surveillance state, a huge military presence all over the world, or any system of health care or higher education that Wall Street cannot draw advantage from in some way (health insurance schemes designed in the interests of capital formation, student debt that cannot be discharged, etc.) Gay rights, marijuana legalization, etc., are now good for business and can also be used as wedge issues and distractions.
Whether unfettered immigration drives down wages and causes dislocation, and whether NAFTA harmed some parts of Mexico so much that the people are driven to go north for work, is almost never discussed. If you try to broach the subject, you'll be accused of racism immediately, when the people who set up this system clearly had no concern for the immigrants. Worse yet, so many immigrants are refugees WE created. Now, we refuse them shelter and a fair hearing. How far right is that?
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
@m3ke68 Take a look at where the most powerful people in each branch of government went to school. Then see where CEOs of major companies studied, including the ones where the founders did not finish a Bachelor's. Higher ed is more stratified than ever.
When I was a kid, a full-time summer job covered a full year's of in-state tuition everywhere: Texas, Michigan, Virginia, Wisconsin, Illinois, California. No exceptions. And a degree from any one of those schools wasn't quite at the level of the advantages Harvard/Yale/Princeton, etc., would give you, but it provided great opportunities. That's long over.
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
There is a sweet spot for UBI, shown in several compelling studies. Just enough but not too much UBI raises employment: people are more relaxed and give better interviews, they come across as easier to work with, they dress better, get new shoes, get their teeth cleaned, and their nails done. Their health care costs go down.
This has been proven. Is there such a thing as too much UBI? Yes, the data supports that, too, but nowhere near as strongly. Just enough yields greater productivity, not less.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@jasonstroon There is very, very limited evidence that vaccines limit spread of the virus. This is because vaccinated people have contracted COVID, but only mild cases. Presumably, they can transmit it, and they may fail to get tested, thinking they cannot get COVID because they were vaccinated, or simply because their COVID feels like a little cold. Hence they may spread it more than those who are careful, get regular tests, wear masks, etc.
We also don't know how long immunity lasts. I've read 6 months. I think they are giving a low estimate as a precaution, but what if it is only 6 months? Booster shots, twice a year? You're sure that's prudent, and safe?
In principle, new virus + new technology, never used en masse, is a greater risk than new virus + traditional vaccine, or known virus + new technology. That's a basic fact of risk assessment. mRNA could turn out to be a real breakthrough, though. I just think caution is in order. So far, this vaccine causes more side effects, especially in women, than just about any other vaccine in general use. Odd, given that men are more likely to develop serious COVID. (Suddenly, we can't be feminists again. Next hashtag, we'll have to be.)
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
Not only that, but when I was in high-school and college, with people in their late teens and twenties, a serious viral illness -- mononucleosis, food-borne hepatitis, pneumonia, meningitis -- took from 6 months to a full year for the patient to be back to 100% normal, as though they had never been sick. These were people in their prime, not middle-aged people with chronic conditions. The WHO doesn't even consider diagnosing "long COVID" before twelve weeks.
This is very common. When I was a kid, my father called it "post-influenza weakness" and told me to exercise or walk a little bit more each day. He was right.
If you want to make someone really sick, tell them you don't believe "it's a thing." They'll feel worse in a matter of minutes. You might get a fever spike out of them, too.
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@utah_koidragon7117 I actually agree with most of this. Almost all, in fact.
Based on the title of the video, I was afraid I would cringe -- but now I see RFK Jr is basically right again. JFK had a national fitness program, the President's Council on Physical Fitness. It's no joke, it is essential. Kids are on SSRIs, ADHD medication, puberty blockers(!) . . . And were forced to take a COVID vaccine almost none of them needed, that was never tested on kids, and had a horrible safety profile for young men. Kids need to be on fresh air and push ups, not these dangerous drugs.
If you ever get a chance, look at Robert Whitaker, Anatomy of an Epidemic -- about how mental illness became an "epidemic" in the US, and how drugs that only a minority of sufferers actually need were pushed on millions, including kids. He explains how companies like Pfizer captured the medical establishment, and he mentions Pfizer by name as the slickest in their marketing.
Looking at those older sources now is eye opening, and truly saddening as well. We don't have many people to defend us. :/
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
@bradleyriles3889 There are lots of reasons why the dollar may be fragile, and none of them trace back to democratic government. All of them have to do, in one way or another, with Wall Street's capture of the reins of power. A fragile dollar's ultimate backstop is a huge military. By democratic government, I mean one that strives to embody the will of the people. As for me, I got a degree in a country where I am not a citizen tuition-free; fees were under $1000 per year. This is what college is in most of the rest of the world.
If a person works full-time for $12 an hour for 14 weeks over the summer, they'll have close to $6000, roughly. That's what a year's tuition at a state school should cost, maximum, and not a cent more. (I think it's still too much, personally, but I'm a realist. Of course community college should be tuition-free, fees only, at least for freshmen. Chances are they are there, instead of at university, because of some calamity, a true family tragedy, or because K-12 failed them.)
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@nicktoofar3514 So, because of monopoly power, small vendors have little choice but to sell on Amazon, and Amazon has the means to analyze the market, which the small vendor was able to stake out at significant risk, then make an imitation of the same product at NO risk, and promote it ahead of the original -- and on top of it, undercut the price. This spells the end of that small vendor. Do you really not appreciate the marginal value of a dollar to a behemoth (basically nil), and the power of concentrated wealth? Of course, Amazon won't do that to everyone, because then the jig would be up. But they can do it to a LOT of people, and keep doing it, because of their dominance. How do you think someone ends up with a net worth the equivalent of 50 million+ bucks a year for every year since Year 1? (How do you think Amazon got to create billionaires without turning a profit for years and years? But that's another story.) Gosh people have no clue how vast fortunes are acquired.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@justinmyres3487 Total agreement. The term "gender affirming care" itself is much too vague. If a boy wants to wear a dress and nail polish, let him. If a girl wants to wear a crewcut and play hockey, let her. If they get bullied, protect them. If they need counseling, get them counseling. Where does anyone see an imperative for dangerous drugs or body-altering surgery, or a reason to risk life-long infertility? What for? They are much too young to consent.
People at 16 swear they will never get married, at 20 they are sure they don't want children --- and at 34, they meet someone, fall in love, get married, and have their first child. It happens all the time. (Or have we stopped being the land of opportunity?) I say preserve the choice.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@shaykayback I'll tell you what. When essential workers cannot make ends meet but everywhere you look, you see grifters of every stripe becoming fabulously wealthy, something is very wrong. Who needs to look a hundred years ago (though that brings us to the decade that saw the rise of Hitler and the 1929 stock market crash, incidentally)? Take a look at more recent history, when many people alive today were already born. In 1950, 1960, 1970, 1980 you certainly did not see this many assets in the hands of so very few. What happened? (Can you say "financialization?") Do you think the quality of life is better now? Do you think everyone was "equally poor" in 1970? No. A minimum wage summer job paid for in-state tuition for a full year at the premier state universities throughout the country. Two people making minimum wage could live in any major city -- frugally, but they could. It paid the rent in San Francisco or New York. That's called freedom.
Take a look at all the corporations that have no profits but their founders are billionaires. Hm. How did that happen? Take a look at all the corporations that either pay no taxes, or pay more to lobbyists than they do in taxes. Hm. Odd, isn't it?
When Uber went public, it stated in its IPO documents that its business model may never lead to profitability. Gee. What happened to market discipline?
IOW, don't give me that crap. Don't imagine everyone is stupid.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@RebornLegacy How ironic that in criticizing the post for overstating the issue, you call it "hysterical rambling." I read it again carefully. Not hysterical, and certainly not rambling.
Ideological intolerance is a huge problem, but I think most people do not see how or why it arose. A phenomenally tight labor market, a wildly competitive and expensive system of higher education, with far too few scholarships or opportunities for tuition waivers on the basis of need or merit, an anti-intellectual bent to American society, and . . . the drive to make school "more like a business." Well, there's no First Amendment freedom of speech or expression in most businesses. Most business instead seek to instill "corporate culture," and get rid of whoever doesn't fit in. Once you make university the same, there will be a big fight to see who gets to define the university's corporate culture.
See the documentary "Inside Job" for a clearer picture of the result of these trends. Or consider that Business has been the most popular major for 30 years, and that something called "Financial Engineering" is a hot field.
What is true is that the new neoliberals of government and academe, and their IP cousins, got nothin' on Joe McCarthy.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
We had near-free education: in-state tuition for a full academic year at Michigan, California, Virginia, Texas, Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, everywhere, was something a student could earn by working full time in the summer. The kids who were able to do this were a different people. They were very often grownups, ready for college and for personal responsibility, at 18, and they graduated without significant debt as well.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@gdiwolverinemale2745 Ha, are you ever funny. So, they want to start businesses without going into debt? They are looking to remain productive, and increase their productivity, based on interest, talent and prudence, without debt? Note: No banks need to be involved. "Oh, the horror! The horror!" You are the one trying to make an emotional appeal. That isn't receiving an "early pension," that is maintenance of the status quo. Note: no debt, and that means no control over them by creditors. "Oh, oh, the horror!" 🤣
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Nursery school in France has required a Master's degree for ages now. "The youngest should have the best" is a basic principle anywhere where you see kids excel in reading, mathematics, piano, gymnastics, theatre, ballet. Private schools in New York are the same, but they cost a fortune. Granted, that is school, not childcare.
As for the speech, Meloni resurrected slogans last used during WWII. That's what people in Italy and those who speak Italian are focusing on. It's not proof that she is fascist but it certainly raises the question. In France, the collaborators used to say "work, family, fatherland." Kind-of ironic, since they were betraying France.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@mariaangelicabrunellsolar7086 It is. Capitalism is a religion, money is a sacrament. We not only shun but heap scorn and virtually stone anyone who doesn't have it, and worship anyone who does, regardless of the circumstances. We treat Musk and Gates like oracles. Gates can propose to try to blot out the sun to end global warming. We have fanciful ideas about where profit comes from and how, and above all we pretend the armed forces have nothing to do with it. There are no forms of slavery or servitude in the world any more. Planned collapses of industry and finance that force families from their homes are natural disasters. The most perverse behavior by those who seek profit is natural. If a dating app makes money, then that's how you should meet people. If your parents or spouse hold you back from "success" then get rid of them, they're the devil. If you don't, it's your own fault. Any lack of "success" is your own fault.
Of all the "elite" people who consorted with Epstein, did a single one approach him and suggest that he was doing something wrong and needed to stop? When Gates tried to push Allen out of Microsoft while Allen was being treated for lymphoma, did Ballmer refuse to do the dirty work or did he jump right in? Anyone who points this out is very jealous and negative. If they could do these things, they would. But they can't, they're inferior.
Take it on faith. No normal thinking process could pervert a person to this point.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Not even comparable.
Have you ever known anyone from Oklahoma? That "Indian princess" family lore is silly, not sinister, and of course she has some Cherokee ancestry. Like I said, Oklahoma.
Having said that, I would never vote for her, for more substantial reasons. And she got where she is by first, studying hard, becoming an expert in bankruptcy law, and then making sure she got the credit for it -- by marrying well, among other things. She has a lot in common with the Clintons and Tony Blair, and with Biden, for that matter.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@fortusvictus8297 Adam Smith supported the maintenance of "the commons," and warned against allowing the rentier class to create monopolies and extract wealth without earning it, which Smith considered a concerted subversion of the mechanism of the Invisible Hand, and the only real threat to free markets. IOW, we aren't even up to the standards of Adam Smith, much less . . . Modern day "commons" are clean air, clean water, universal public education and universal health care. Once you have that, and reach the age of adulthood, all the rest is up to you. Like I said, we aren't even up to that level. Pfft.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Treat this as a real emergency. Get her off of any drug safely. Consult a new doctor. Make a comprehensive plan: someone has got to take time off and do this. Family Medical Leave Act. She should take a shower every morning. Then take her for a long walk in nature (park, beach, forest preserve) every day. Then go shopping together for fresh, unprocessed food, and cook with her. Cut her screen time, turn off screens at 9 pm. Get a reading program and a cinema program together. Reading real books results in thoughts and even eye movements that are good for your brain. Take her to art galleries, plays. Have a new outing per week, or so; two per month as a minimum. Never mention her tatoos and piercings. Encourage any art or music she wants to pursue. Buy her a journal. Don't let anyone else touch it.
I'm serious. You can fix this by July if you do it. Or, let it drag on for years, get in shouting matches periodically, not know where she is for a weekend or two, only to get a call from a hospital or the cops. You know. What most people do.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@edwardcoit9748 But when you remove discrimination from blacks, they succeed as well: which is why blacks from UK, France, Ethiopia, Somalia, Sudan, Kenya, Nigeria, etc., do just fine. Maybe you are unfamiliar with the global black intelligentsia? A lot of prolific writers who happened to be black were finally given a podium since the death of George Floyd. Have you, er, noticed?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
If this is a "powerful" message, it shows how far we've fallen. Meloni resurrected some slogans last used during WWII. That's what people in Italy and those who speak Italian are focusing on. It's not proof that she is fascist by any stretch, but it certainly raises the question. In France, the collaborators used to say "work, family, fatherland." Kind-of ironic, since they were betraying France.
I thought it was even more ironic that commentators here cite her support of Ukraine as evidence of liberalism. Considering how strong the neo-Nazis are there, and how much they influence the military and government, well beyond their numbers, I would hold off on interpreting that as a positive. There are no good guys waging that 8-year-long war, however much Putin is the worst actor in the picture at the moment.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@xitlallicommentstoday2169 To me, that makes the overreaction of the principal all the more unwise. Send him home to wash his face and call it a day. The less attention placed on him, the better. Doing nothing would have been far preferable to making him famous.
And you're right, those who listened to the end know that Jessica said it made no sense to slap a racist label on him. He's too young to be a "racist." He's a kid.
Also, I thought principals were supposed to know something about school law. Although courts give school administrators huge deference in their decisions concerning discipline, a suspension can be a violation of his rights, because he does have a right to a public education and he does have a measure of free speech in school, though obviously not what adults in a traditional free speech forum have. The point is, though, to avoid lawsuits. This is dumber than it looks -- it will probably cost the school district money, and to what end? This was really senseless.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@peetky8645 What I would like is for the in-state tuition of the late, great public universities to be something a kid could pay by working all summer. Up until the 1980s, a minimum wage summer job covered a full year of in-state tuition and fees, and oftentimes books and supplies as well, at nearly all of the public universities. Work-study covered most of the rest. The kids who worked their own way through school were a different people.
Let private colleges do whatever the h€ll they like. And no, I don't want to pay for those. That should not be foisted on the public.
Nor do I want qualified kids to be held back by being shoved into community colleges. This almost always holds back the most talented. They belong on the campus of a real university, with doctoral students around to interact with from Day 1. They need that rush of enthusiasm and motivation. They shouldn't have to wait two more years. Enough of this waiting! That goes for unpaid summer "internships," too. Every internship should have, at minimum, a stipend equal to $15.00 per hour, 35-hour week. Anything else is bull****.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@royjacobs1204 Happens every time. Back in the '60s and '70s, the major state universities -- Michigan, Virginia, Berkeley, etc. -- were essentially free. A summer job paid for a year of tuition, fees, and required texts. Well, some of those working class kids actually worked hard and excelled in engineering, mathematics, physics, chemistry, pre-med, squeezing out the kids of the rich, who came to college to join the right fraternity and make connections. You know that had to end.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
It is illegal to use deadly force in defense of mere property, everywhere. Lethal force is justified if you put any person at risk of imminent physical harm. It is never legal for defense of mere property. Social ills, etc., are irrelevant. The age of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Whether he put a person in danger of physical harm is the only question that matters.
It is a bright line. We have a lot of gun owners in America, and this isn't common knowledge? Wow, just wow.
Also, this is exactly why a carjacking, or a home invasion while there are people in the house, can be met with lethal force. It doesn't matter if the assailant turns out to be unarmed, or was just looking to burgle and thought the house was empty, or was only a juvenile. There is no question about this. It's called self-defense for a reason.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@dloesch Well, because, unfortunately, what we need now is a multivariate analysis, and those are very hard to do. I'm serious. I do NOT trust the drug companies to do them, because too many judgment calls must be made, and I expect them all to be made in one direction.
Too many things have changed: the virus, the lockdowns, the stress, and then the vaccines. It could be that having the virus, then a vaccine is the most dangerous -- and young people were the most likely to be asymptomatic, and there were not enough tests available in early 2020, and the young were forced to be vaccinated to come back to SCHOOL or participate in normal life. So it's obvious more than one factor is involved.
This should never have been done in the first place, even for a drug with no known side effects. It was an EUA drug, and most young people had no reason to chose to take it. It should have always been a choice, for everyone. Vaccinating those who had recovered from COVID when it was never tested on that group was particularly unethical.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
No we're not. I was in a formerly communist country this fall, with profoundly anti-communist people, who were close relatives of known dissidents. Even they had no problem stating there were some good things about communism. In their country, the communists solved homelessness. Yes, solved. What are we getting in return?
Actually, that's what not being propagandized means. They had no problem saying this. They didn't look over their shoulders first, or fear what reaction I might have.
In fact, I have another example: they were vaccinated, with Pfizer, and instead of pushing it, they matter-of-factly stated the vaccines have been a big disappointment, and that they are holding off on boosters. Imagine what it must be like to have internalized free speech! Sweet, huh? I remember those days.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Elite colleges are questionable themselves -- exactly. Why are they the near-exclusive incubators of future politicians, judges, corporate leaders? But given that they are, admissions need to be rethought from top to bottom. Did these "elite" institutions form a James Baldwin, a John Coltrane, a James Jamerson, a David Goggins, or a Simone Biles? Well, why not? (Two of these five were in the Navy, by the way.) Even eminent black academics often went to the traditional black colleges or to the great state universities, rather than to schools like Yale. Toni Morrison went to Cornell, but only for her Master's, after excelling at Howard. "Something is wrong with this picture," as they say.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@capttrips1523 Yeah, I hate everybody else, too.
Most developed countries DO have public housing, and very basic public assistance to avoid actual hunger and homelessness, which can harm an entire population, not just those going hungry and living under bridges, and their young adults start out life with the education they need, and basic health care. Most developed countries DO have excellent public transit, at very low cost, and many have excellent, low cost train systems. The lack of accountability YOU should care about: Wall Street crashes the global financial system, gets even bigger bailouts and bonuses; a Tony Hayward presides over the worst ecological disaster in history (BP's well explodes) and goes on to a MUCH better job and more money right after. Trump has six bankruptcies, no problem. He can be a billionaire and president. HSBC is caught laundering drug money and possible terrorist funds -- oh well. Too Big To Prosecute.
What in the world are YOU worrying about? Wake up.
3
-
3
-
@TheRatsintheWalls So, are you being sincere, or a pious jerk, too? I can't tell. It was incorrect to impute ad hominem, or some insipid values blather, to my posts. Sorry, Bub. It is too obviously not present. These debates are not all about "values." We can quantify this stuff. I agree irresponsibility is a bad thing, on absolutely every level. When you see it on the smallest scale, however, might it be due to systematic demoralization? When you see it at the very top, is it comparable? No. It isn't.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@current_interest He had THREE opportunities, THREE. In February, when he knew and he lied about the dangerousness, again in April, when hotspots were overwhelming hospital capacity and even morgue capacity in a few places, like QUEENS, and AGAIN, when Trump contracted it himself.
Had he come out of the hospital fighting to make his treatment available to all hospitals, and to pass another stimulus, do or die, and if he had talked about subsidies for essential workers, and promised it -- he would have been reelected.
He encouraged resistance to friggin' masks.
His niece Mary is right about his pathological narcissism. He cannot focus for an instant on anyone but himself. His whole campaign was whining about how mean the press has been, and about how Biden (Biden!!) is a "socialist." What a sick _____.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Bri muddled this. It is illegal to use deadly force in defense of mere property, everywhere. Lethal force is justified if you put any person at risk of imminent physical harm. It is never legal for defense of mere property. Social ills, etc., are irrelevant. The age of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Whether he put a person in danger of physical harm is the only question that matters.
It is a bright line. We have a lot of gun owners in America, and this isn't common knowledge? Wow, just wow.
Also, this is exactly why a carjacking, or a home invasion while there are people in the house, can be met with lethal force. It doesn't matter if the assailant turns out to be unarmed, or was just looking to burgle and thought the house was empty, or was only 13. There is no question about this. It's called "self-defense" for a reason.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
The most common major by far is Business, and has been for 30 years. Most such degrees are a demonstration of docility. In 2001-2002, and 2008-2009, computer science grads were not getting offers. If a corporation will not interview you unless you have a degree, a corporation will not interview you unless you have a degree. I don't believe anyone thinks that is fair. That changes nothing.
I don't think people understand the current labor market.
BTW, daughter of Vietnamese immigrant Mom Kim Iversen has a degree in Philosophy. She always talks about the value of college, and all the women who did pedicures 55 hours per week to make sure their kids went.
Once upon a time not that long ago, a student could pay in-state tuition and fees for a full year at the great state universities (Michigan, Wisconsin, Berkeley, Virginia, Texas, . . . ) with a full-time summer job making the minimum wage. People who did that were a different people.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@Games_and_Music Face it, the typical mindset is to blame the victim. The fact that not one of these "elite" people ever said to Epstein, "hey, what are you doing? Stop it, these are kids," tells you everything. All these foundations, Gates, Clinton, with special programs to empower women and girls . . . So, we know they thought about it, hm?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@tooitchy I still remember when the kids who went to college worked all summer and earned enough to pay a full year of in-state tuition, fees, and books. They graduated with very little or no debt -- you were expected to earn scholarships and work part-time. Then, a couple of roommates could go anywhere with their degree -- Los Angeles, Seattle, San Francisco, Boston, New York, get a minimum wage job, and afford the rent. It was a modest life, but possible. People were proud to strike out on their own and live modestly. After all, their parents grew up during the Depression.
By the time I got to college, this was impossible. But the students I'm describing were different people. I envy them. They had opportunity. They expected to do for themselves. It was shameful not to.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@brasshouse-fireball First of all, I didn't mention Sweden. Second, you seem to have omitted Germany. Third, and most important, YOUR IMPLICATION was that Native Americans get "all sorts of stuff for free," and that that has kept them poor. Doesn't seem to have made generations of ordinary Europeans poor -- or Wall Street over here, for that matter.
When a student attending a premier state university could earn their entire year's tuition and textbook budget by working full time over the summer, you had more mature, diligent, resourceful, and well-read students here. Now you have indebted, immature conformists who are more likely to go home to live with their parents than to try anything new. Well, they're in debt. And they never had the opportunity to earn their own way, for anything. We did this to them. Just keep it up, bro. Double down. Working out great . . . :/
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
We KNOW about the dangers of drugs and alcohol. We don't remember Judy Garland, Jimi Hendrix, Elvis, Prince, Michael Jackson, Basquiat, and on and on and on? This should never happen anymore.
If a multimillionaire needs a personal aide to be with them at all times, and needs yoga instructors, massage therapists, mental health counselors, and organic chefs to visit them daily, they can afford all that and more. I don't get it. Not anymore.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@bradleyriles3889 No, in fact, there are not a lot of liberal arts graduates in total, and very, very few outside of those aiming for law school, an MBA, or an MPA. The most common major by far is Business Administration and has been for nearly 30 years. Next come all the health sciences, with Nursing on top. If the STEM fields aren't next, then possibly Education is, but in any case they are again vocationally oriented. Kids who used to major in English now major in Communications or Advertising, and know how to film videos and set up websites.
I didn't say that countries don't need armed forces. I said multinational corporations, which are permitted to function like governments in so many ways, as well as capture (what are supposed to be democratic) governments, should provide their own security, too. Why should I pay for it?
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@2FINE4YOUBABYGIRL In fact, no one who does not have two solid years of living expenses in cash equivalents, in addition to an emergency fund, and a guaranteed base income (T bonds, that sort of thing) can be considered secure. That usually means being really, really resourceful and astute, and lucky -- or having a financial net worth of a million per person in the household, and little or no mortgage on where you actually live. That is what financial advisors tell their rich clients, so that they never have to sell off assets at distressed prices. Because most people, even affluent people, one day will.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kdnick8584 When all of these politicians went to college, a minimum wage summer job covered a full year of tuition and fees, in-state, at all the great state universities, from Virginia to Michigan to Berkeley, Texas, SUNY, Minnesota, Illinois -- no exceptions. Almost anyone could cobble together enough for room and board, between jobs, grants, and a few hundred a month from parents. Books were cheap.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@joeymac4302 There are certain accusations that one would expect the accused to refute. Failure to refute them is not proof of wrongdoing, but it usually raises questions, and may even be circumstantial evidence that tends to point to wrongdoing. Trump's taxes are a perfect example. When ALL other candidates release theirs, AND we know Trump is a businessman with many farflung interests, bankruptcies in his past, etc., so we KNOW his taxes would never be pristine, and HE knows no one expects them to be pristine -- well, at that point, you do have to wonder what the heck he's been hiding.
Given the concern with misinformation and voter manipulation, you WOULD think that a possible future president would want to declare the emails to be fraudulent as soon as possible, if it were possible -- to make sure the electorate was not left wondering about it. You know, for our sakes, the good of the country, etc.
Anyway, tonight Joe decided to lie about Hunter, and avoid the real issue as usual. Trump looked like he was flummoxed that two could play that game! Not to mention, Joe has real experience in that arena. I'd say his lying came across better. He's on a roll.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@daniellove162 Who ignored any of that? The obvious default is to allow them to be sold, and the steep uphill climb is to question them. At some point, we need to pause and reassess. Because at present, there is no such discussion -- as usual, where technology is concerned. People dive lemming-like to embrace an apparent convenience, and don't even consider for a moment what grave effects on privacy it might entail. That is the story of 21st century consumer technology. Any proposal to limit it in any way is met with instant derision. Well, all of these "conveniences" have turned people into howling toddlers, for one thing.
Who cares whether I impress or not? That seems to be your obsession, not mine. And ultimately, I don't care. That's the real default, for everything. Make a buck off of the Next Big Thing, or turn the page.
P. S. Are you pictures any good?
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@brianhillis3701 This is always the story you're told, and it certainly has a grain of truth, but state schools did NOT have to lose tax revenues and force up prices to build football stadiums, luxury dorms, and sports complexes. It was a choice. The VAST majority of students have vocational majors, and have for decades. What do you think the single most common major is? Business, of course -- and it has been, for decades. Then come all the health-related majors, with Nursing at the top. A Business degree, without either enough accounting to pass the CPA, or enough advanced math to understand finance in depth, is USELESS. Those are people who hate to read and can't write, and don't complete a year of calculus. Of course they don't speak a foreign language unless they learned it at home.
A Business degree without rigour is a demonstration of docility -- nothing more. It also signals that your parents weren't very imaginative, and worse yet, weren't rich. The oligarchs look down on that. Oh, the irony!
2
-
@brianhillis3701 Well then you do know. But you also must know that labor markets change, sometimes rapidly. I remember when the "tech bubble" burst right around the same time as the 9/11 attacks, and Computer Science majors were unemployed. Come 2003, fresh grads with the same degrees were preferred over those who had worked part-time at Staples since their 2001 graduation, selling computers. Graduate into a serious recession, you risk not catching up for a decade. So, what to do? Going back to school, with more debt, sounds completely insane, but . . . Well. What would you tell your son or daughter? I would not want a Computer Science major to settle for Staples, that's for sure. I'd give them as much money as I could, and have them take a night class at some high-prestige, expensive joint! You play it as it lays. :/
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Pan-Britannic Traditionalist Conservative Of course I do. You think modern day rentier are just landowners? Oh boy. I'm not going to say what I'm thinking. Did you stop reading books in 1900?
"Russia and China have no safety net." First, that is either incoherent or untrue; second, a non sequitur. (Are you saying they DON'T educate their children? Are you suggesting they infantilize them, to boot? Well, if they are as intent on building up their militaries as you claim, I think you have your answer right there.) YOU really don't know what anyone is talking about!
Listen, I don't have a dog in this fight. My family is in Europe, literally all of them, and if I live long enough, I'll join them. You just keep it up. Makes no difference to me, old chap.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Goodhello369 Wrong about what? That AP is purely an elective, not a required class? That a private non-profit entity, namely the College Board, sets the standard for the course? That no one is ever required to take such a class for high school graduation? That if an AP class does lead to actual college credit, then it is legitimate -- and if it doesn't, then it is misleading the students who elect to take it?
Or that a seminal article was written well over a generation ago, before this became the bruhaha and political grift that it now is?
No, all that stuff is true.
Oh, wait. You're telling me that there are public school teachers who don't know any of this, and haven't read these authors, and are just spouting propaganda they are told to spout, and taking home a paycheck? That such teachers actually exist? In 2023? I'm shocked, I tell you! Shocked, shocked!!
2
-
2
-
@Goodhello369 Just read about it. Bottom line, anything can be relabeled, just like in false advertising or counterfeit goods. Parents have to review the actual materials and ask to see what their child will be given in school in order to know what is actually being taught. However, what Bostic was involved in is elementary school curricula, which is where the laws against CRT are stringent.
This has no bearing at all on elective AP classes in senior high school, except insofar as parents should always ask to review the required reading. Texts should be available to them to look over, during board meetings, parent-teacher night, parent-teacher open house, PTA meetings, etc. I'm all for it. None of it should be hidden or mislabeled. And AP should be accepted for actual college credit, as promised, or it's not real. My position from the start.
The one good thing about classes from home via Zoom is that more parents found out what was going on.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Scott Covert The point was to make the university more like a business, rather than the unique institution it once was, taking its inspiration from Plato and Aristotle. Well, now we're there. The most common major BY FAR is Business Administration, and has been for at least 30 years. The next most common is, broadly, the Health Sciences, with Nursing in first place. Students graduate with serious debt, so of course most treat university primarily as a trade school. Academic freedom has been dumped in favor of Tone Policing, and the new Advertising/Marketing landscape of Facebook/Twitter. To get a job, students learn to massage their image and stay on the good side of HR departments. So, the schools are giving the kids what they need to make money.
A lot of people wanted university to be a business. Well, what's wrong now? There's no free speech at a business.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@lydialutz My goodness. Where to begin?
No. It's futile. You're unaware of the history of the term and its recent use, or what the central characteristic of a baseless, often conspiratorial, explanation is: it grossly violates Occam's Razor, and new iterations of it are typically grosser violations. In other words, in response to contrary evidence, it gets more and more complex.
I still remember when George Bush didn't want to answer an inconvenient question and his eyes lit up, a smirk formed on his face, he pursed his lips, and said, " that's a conspiracy theory." Magic words. No further thought needed.
Your government thanks you for continuing to push this "narrative." Narrative!! 🤣
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@norman_5623 Thank you. I am so surprised that no one seems to be clear on this. Even in Texas, the conditions you have to meet, such as attempting to use something less than lethal force, or proving that lethal force was necessary without trying other means first, ends up enriching criminal defense lawyers. (The offender won't get your property, but the lawyer will get a chunk.) Various Castle Doctrine laws have to do with occupied structures. In lots of states, you have no obligation to wait and see who is breaking into your house while you are at home, much less waiting to see whether that intruder is armed. You are presumed to be defending your life and limb, and you can use deadly force. It will not matter that the person turned out to be unarmed or under 18. :/
When a drunken kid tries to break into a house he thinks he has a right to enter, and he gets killed that way, people act surprised, but the truth is, the person inside the home is presumed to be defending himself and had a legal right to shoot. I know one kid in Colorado died right in the doorway, but the homeowner was with an infant and was not legally in the wrong (we can talk about ethics separately). The kid broke in. That is a tragedy.
A nation full of gun owners doesn't know the rules.
I'm shocked every day. Shoot me now, put me out of my misery. ;(
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@marieroxylox1456 1. "Gender Studies" (the new name for Women's Studies) degrees are rarities, accounting for about 0.5 to 2% of all degrees. The others you mention are relatively uncommon degrees as well, compared to Business, and they lead most often to Law School. "Gender Studies" may be a pre-law degree as well, or the person may go on to an MFA, MPL, etc. Or, doctorates, of course, and then writing books (there is little point to a PhD if you aren't going to write actual books, plural, although some historians and political scientists do work as civil servants for the State Department). Gender Studies is not usually a terminal degree that can lead to a job, true enough, the way an EE degree pretty well always will.
In short, the degrees you mention have nothing to do with the prohibitive cost of higher education, or make much difference concerning anyone's inability to pay back their loan.
Sorry for knowing stuff. You're right, it is useless. And worse than futile. Why did I even write this? I clearly had the wrong major.
2
-
@ubiquitousdiabolus Well, people with those degrees typically go on to get an MSW, an MFA, a Master's in Education, a JD, or even an MPA or MBA (if they took enough math). Or they go to college primarily for social reasons, then get a paralegal certificate, or they train in one of the med/tech fields, and get hired before those without the BA. Yes, I know people like that. Yes, a major hospital will hire a person with any BA plus certification to operate the MRI machine or to give mammograms before they will hire someone from community college. Fair or not, it's simply true.
A friend who was a Marine and then got an art degree from one of the best schools in the world now sets up communications infrastructure (anything and everything to do with connecting to the Internet, etc.) and they fly him out all around the country to do the work spectacularly well, and make it LOOK NICE, too. Hectoring kids into majoring in Business or Nursing when they don't want to is the mistake. You have to like what you're doing to do it well.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gnlout7403 No, actually, most reasonable people (and thus also the law) would not treat those words, in that context, as a genuine threat. The fact that she calmly called in a 911 report rather than FIRST seeking safety, by removing herself from the area proves she did not, either.
Please don't go into law enforcement.
Should I really believe you? One of my closest friends was a Marine, enlisted right after 9/11, put in 13 years, and I cannot imagine him agreeing that was a genuine threat. He would have thought the guy was rude and abrasive, but threatening? I'll have to ask him, I'm curious now.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@Suze, @thegoodsmaster Exactly! And I am serious when I say so many new "jobs" involve propaganda production: all MSM, all social media, advertising, marketing, public relations, think tanks, NGOs, foundations, PACs and other lobbying organizations, all political party jobs . . . I am sure I am forgetting something big.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@TheRatsintheWalls BUT that is NOT what I'm doing. Did you read my whole comment? My point is, he ignores the people who are not only getting basics taken care of despite their irresponsibility, but are vacuuming up billions, even trillions, while causing clear, identifiable harm, to everyone, that we can document. It's not impressions, opinions, etc. HSBC really did get away with major money laundering. Major Wall Street bankers and others did manipulate markets, LIBOR, etc. The BP well did explode, and leaving BP made Tony Hayward vastly richer. Vastly. I can have a real discussion with anybody who sees that, too. I don't care how conservative they are, culturally or otherwise. Thus guy punches down, knowingly or not! Time to WAKE UP.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@mkhud50n They are almost certainly hiding the origins of the virus. They did hide the initial outbreak. I'm more interested in what else they are not telling the rest of the world, that they have an obligation to tell.
I was opposed to the lockdowns, by the way. Early (by Feb 1), short, and really hard may have made a difference. Mid-March to June 1 was just torment and economic ruin for millions, with very limited benefit, if any, and side effects we are still suffering from, including poor mental health, irrational fear, and the willingness to do anything they tell us to do to avoid another lockdown. The unethical and probably illegal vaccine mandates were a product of the irrational fear of COVID and of new lockdowns.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@gavintrades3425 Easy: fifty years ago, minimum wage jobs covered rent, medical care, and in-state tuition literally everywhere in the country. This gave people opportunities to become educated, live where they want, and try out different jobs without being petrified of ending up on the street. The top four quintiles in income had a chance. Now, only the top quintile does; in fact, only the top 10% is truly secure.
No, Silicon Valley and Wall Street have not provided us with a better life. They have provided us with a financialized service economy and mass surveillance, plus advertising we can no longer spot and defend ourselves against. When people are always watched and don't make real things, count on lying to be a major job description. No, it's not good.
Also, if you've ever lived in different cities with different levels of inequality, you know from experience that less inequality is better. Some inequality is normal; San Francisco level makes no sense.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@antonioj123 The most common major by far is "Business," and has been for 30 years. Most such degrees are demonstration of docility. Where has that gotten anyone?? Either that, or the "Business" major takes enough advanced math, finance, and accounting to get an MBA and CPA, and maybe even a CFA. Or a second degree in IT.
Once upon a time not that long ago, a student could pay in-state tuition and fees for a full year at the great state universities (Michigan, Wisconsin, Berkeley, Virginia, Texas, . . . ) with a full-time summer job making the minimum wage. People who did that were a different people.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@DoctorCataclysm They may self-censor, and almost certainly will. You must think public employees are more courageous than they are.
Socrates was controversial in community college; what he had to say was too stirring, and went beyond color by numbers. What the administration wanted was insipid textbooks and multiple-choice tests. IOW, punch the ticket and move on.
I should know, I used to teach community college part time, back when I was more public spirited than I am today.
Socrates' sexuality didn't usually come up, but if we read Protagoras or Symposium it did. The Apology, no, Gorgias, no, Republic, no. I did not bring up extraneous matters, NOR did I censor anything.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@kommisar. Read what I said again, and try using your imagination a little. Do you remember what used to be major issues? Here is one example: there was a time when during parent-teacher night/open house, every child's mother and father were expected to come. Well, some mothers worked nights, and some fathers wouldn't come without the mother. Then also, some fathers were handicapped or absent, and some mothers had died. Do you think these "deviations" from the teacher's notion of "norms" were always treated sensitively, or that they are treated with sensitivity now? Do you think a little kid should have had to announce that "my dad left," or "I don't have a father," or "my mom is in a wheelchair?" (Why?)
Do you think there are no children now whose parents are LGBTQ+? Do you imagine they aren't vulnerable to bullying or exclusion? Do you expect instant universal agreement on how that should be addressed? Well then, accommodating a diverse population will ALWAYS raise issues.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@sovereignD What are you talking about? This is a contagious disease. You HAVE TO rely on others to protect you. I will grant, in THIS society, that is exceptionally problematic.
Trump had three opportunities to change this trajectory: in February, when he knew this was airborn. A hard shutdown, over by March, followed by prudent measures to keep the little fires from spreading. A second chance, after COVID already took root, to take scientific recommendations on mitigation seriously. Even a third chance, after he and his family got sick! He could have showed compassion for others, and pushed hard for stimulus. He blew that, too.
People don't like to be reviled, jeered at, and blamed, for falling ill. Just keep it up.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@integrallens6045 I will grant you, it is not intuitive, and at the extremes, there are judgment calls. But in these college cases, the line is drawn when harassment is directed at a particular student, just as it would be in the workplace under Title VII hostile environment discrimination -- which, by the way, is a hard standard to meet. (Justice O'Connor wrote a lot of those opinions for a conservative Court.)
Students are considered personally more vulnerable and in need of protection because they are young, but are also expected to be able to listen to ALL sorts of opinions and be exposed to ideas they find abhorrent without going to pieces. If they feel threatened by an opinion and don't want to engage the speaker in a discussion, they are supposed to learn to walk away, not run to Mommy. They are supposed to organize their own demonstration, or write for the school paper about it, etc. Yeah, well . . .
After the COVID disaster, I don't know how anyone is willing to give the government more power to encroach on any Amendment, including the Second. Personally, I regret having to acknowledge that, but facts are facts. A free society means taking personal responsibility.
My best friend hated guns, then married a veteran who had them. He asked her to join his gun club and give it a chance. If she couldn't do it, he'd get rid of them on the principle that all the adults in the home should be trained. Well, she ended up practicing marksmanship and winning matches. :)
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@liuj88 In one segment, when they were discussing the civil rights case brought by the "Central Park Five," Amber cited completely discredited evidence, and it was evident that no one on the panel had read court documents that were easy to find -- I certainly had no trouble. In New York state at that time, to maintain a civil rights case on that basis required not just dismissal of charges but exoneration, which meant actual evidence of innocence. (Only recently has that requirement been very slightly relaxed -- by the current, conservative Supreme Court, opinion by Kavanaugh, of all people.)
This media is like any other: whenever I know about something independently, I find gaps in their reporting. In a more astute age, we called it talking heads.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
@BiologyalwaysWins You can find these studies from about nine months to one year ago; further studies have shown that the immunity wanes, so that today, most people in the hospital are vaccinated -- though proportionately, it still looks like the "vaccines" reduce the risk of hospitalization, but less and less through time. I've found them.
I have been following the ministries of health of other countries, to be honest, not the CDC. The NIH will publish studies from abroad, and I look carefully to see where the journal and the researchers are based. It takes some research to find them, but they are there, and the benefits are not particularly impressive except for the oldest patients. On balance, it appears men over 50 and women over 60 benefited, and in general people over 70 benefited the most, but they were almost certainly not informed about the risks, to obtain their consent in the first place.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@yn5568 But they were not discussing school choice at all. Bri was putting that issue to the side, to point out that nearly every school -- public, private, semi-privatized/charter -- will face the same issues of accommodating competing interests, UNLESS all of the parents have some say concerning who will be admitted. If you can run a school like a condo association, or like a commune, then you can be certain that every child will come from a home with values generally in line with your own.
I'm not clear why either that, or school choice, have a bearing on this case. There was a CRIME. Crimes happen in schools. Students commit them, teachers commit them, support staff commit them, people from the outside barging in shoot up the place, etc. I think the focus in this story must be on safety.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@DamonBrazzellUkesploitation That was what I noticed when I lived in France. Parents were frequently unmarried, but the dads were more involved than in the States, married or not. It was funny to see guys in a leather jacket, chain bracelet, and smoking, with a baby carriage. When we saw one with an infant in a snuggly, a child by each hand, and a child car seat strapped to his back, my mom and I just looked at each other.
There, the idea of not being a dad because you aren't married or you don't get along with the mother was anathema. It was incomprehensibly unethical. There was no one, man or woman, who didn't want to raise their kids.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@entium1 After the savings and loan crisis, the Reagan administration (Republican) PROSECUTED at least some of the wrongdoing. After the 2008-2009 debacle, the Obama administration (Democrat) FAILED to prosecute a soul. Not ONE person. No clawback of bonuses, either. You mean you forgot?? (Or, you think it is partisan to give credit to a Republican administration for doing something, however small, about enforcing laws pertaining to finance? Huh. Surprised.)
In any event, the POINT is, the person who started this thread with the first comment was exactly right, and you are a trash talking __ who has been neutralized. You can stay up to keep bloviating if that's how you do "self-improvement." No one believes you, if they ever did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@davesears9681 I don't know, and don't think so, but I don't like this whole picture. Unacceptable risks, likely undertaken because of corruption, an accident, and very serious incentives to hide the accident and then to find ways to use the event as an opportunity -- sure. It would hardly be a new phenomenon. This kind of the game plan.
FTX and the 2008 financial crisis both worked a lot like that, and they had nothing to do with viruses. It's a very generic pattern, isn't it? FTX likely had more intent behind it than a legitimate accident would, but 2008 definitely has these features. The BP GoM spill, too, had a few of these features. Tony Hayward became a commodities trader after that and made vastly more money. Perverse incentives are structured that way.
But anyway, an actual grand conspiracy, instead of mini-conspiracies to cover up misdeeds along the way, is not impossible. I don't think there was anything like that going on, but I would never say you're wrong. I keep questions open until I'm really satisfied that I have a true answer, or that I'll never have an answer. :/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rsaggar Agreed completely about origins; not as sure about vaccines, as I have family in an area that offered a variety of vaccines, including Pfizer, AstraZeneca, Sputnik V, and Sinovac, and many chose Sinovac. My family got Pfizer as soon as they could, had no hesitancy at all about getting vaccinated, and now acknowledge the vaccines were a disappointment. Doctors in their region do not recommend boosters for the time being except for those with comorbidities or, of course, for those age 70 and older. They live in a non-ideological society in southern Europe, where saying stuff like this is not a cause for controversy, much less "cancellation." This is all "matter-of-fact" for them.
The safety/efficacy profile of each of the major vaccines is still something we don't have enough solid information about. You have got to wonder why.
Great talking to you, and it is heartening to hear that people still remember that brave Chinese doctor who went public, then died.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chrisrhule1760 Who decided to lock down the country, not for weeks but years, and to go on a wild campaign of denunciation against anyone who refused to comply? When did we have a CALM, reasoned discussion about COVID, in a united spirit? All we had was the worst divisiveness I have ever lived through, the impoverishment of MILLIONS, a mental health crisis, and vituperation from ALL politicians, regardless of party -- who themselves got richer, "somehow."
Wow, just wow. Mattias Desmet. Remember that name.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Here is the actual First Amendment issue:
Let's put this case aside. Let's try a pure hypothetical. A man abused his former wife. She, however, abused him as well, and engaged in truly odd psychological behavior intended to goad him, rather than making honest attempts to get his abuse to end.
Does he have a right to tell his story? Can he publish it? Suppose he tells the truth about her abuse of him, but fails to acknowledge his abuse of her? That may be a pretty seedy discourse, even an infuriating one, and partial, and misleading -- but it is not defamation. It is First Amendment-protected. Or at least it used to be. "Be careful what you wish for."
As for Depp, he has never faced charges. He has only sued, in two countries now. The crowd has you believing he's the victim.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@shahbazshaikh9169 No, your math is wrong. It depends on combinatorics, i.e., how many ways are there to select 20 students from 1000 students, where order is unimportant and repetition is not allowed. But of course that omits the fact that several students who previously dated Teacher A could all take Teacher B's class, etc. You're not accounting for a lot of possibilities.
All people come with feelings, and feelings always matter, but limiting how much one person's feelings should influence policies that deprive others of opportunities is not feelings-driven. I have NO problem with you or anyone else thinking this controversy is enough to turn you away from voting for Morse, just like some people decided not to vote for Krystal. It is the systematic smear job that should worry you. Every single student "victim" of an adjunct lecturer could one day be smeared in the same way, for one thing or another. If you don't see that, I frankly envy you. I was once optimistic that way, too.
If you want to lobby for a rule that no faculty of any rank can ever date a student at the school where they are on the faculty, you are free to do that as well. The reason there is no such rule is partly because of the math.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@chococat746 I agree with you about the ACLU. Depp never sued on the NDA itself, and I don't know why that is. (I wonder if the ACLU advised her it was unenforceable, and why that would be?) The standard for proving defamation is entirely different from the standard for breach of contract. That this was a relitigation of their divorce, not a defamation case, should be obvious, and the result is absurd. If she was abused at all, even if she was the worse one of the pair, she had the right to publish that article. It was substantively true. Abusers have First Amendment rights. Even murderers do. As for Depp, being liable for his lawyer's speech for one cent, much less throw in a couple of million, is mind-boggling. Did Heard prove Depp and the lawyer conspired to float a phony story? And even then. If Depp told him the story, it's confidential. If the lawyer floated it himself after finding out it was weak and could not be presented in court, then he should be personally liable, not Depp. Depp has the right to share anything with his lawyer, anything he thought was true, or suspected, or believed, or even felt, or his pure speculation without proof, etc., and expect his interests to be protected.
1
-
1
-
1
-
@franklin9400 You don't understand my point. If you understand that Section 230 blocks liability, then don't talk about the proposed law, to limit young minors' use of social media, as being an impediment to lawsuits, like Robby seems to have alluded to, and that some posts here imply. There already is no liability.
Section 230 does more than that -- it allows platforms to remove posts without liability, too. Just because they remove some does not mean they assume risk, have to be consistent, etc. In other words, they have editorial control without editorial responsibility. Maybe that's necessary, but in any case you clearly don't know that law if that's all you think it's about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@archstantonainthere4526 Look, some contracts are adhesion contracts. A student loan is not exactly that, but it's in a gray area for sure. What do you say to someone who got a job after high school, and at 21 they see no future for themselves above $18/hour without a degree? Not every girl can be a plumber or an electrician, much less a truck driver, or a foreign car mechanic. People in retail see promotions blocked. RETAIL. It is evident that, right or wrong, college is increasingly necessary. Back when it wasn't, like, FIFTY years ago, all of the great state schools had such low tuition that a minimum wage summer job paid a full year of in-state tuition and fees, and you could cobble together scholarships, work-study, and a hundred bucks a month from home to cover the rest. Or, you could work minimum wage for a year, live at home, get about 5% interest on a savings account, and pay for four years of tuition yourself, and use summer jobs for room and board. Now, when college is far more necessary, the money isn't there and kids have to borrow. What happened? On top of it, loans cannot be discharged in bankruptcy BUT accrue extreme amounts of interest. You don't see how unfair this is?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@utah_koidragon7117 I have no idea what you mean by that. What I stated was accurate. If someone, somewhere is trying to milk this (just as big pharma has), how does that affect what I said? And who is suggesting any particular therapy for long COVID that has any resemblance whatsoever to trans? It's exactly the opposite: better nutrition, better sleep, more fresh air and exercise, fasting protocols, certain vitamins --- those are the interventions that doctors are suggesting.
I had unusual fatigue after an unusually severe cold in 2019. I got a complete checkup, and a recommendation not to baby myself and to take long walks, which I started doing that very evening. My doctor predicted I'd be fine in 2 to 3 weeks. That's exactly what happened. I've had post-viral syndromes that lasted much longer. I've known people who had had viral meningitis, viral pneumonia, mononucleosis, etc., who took nearly a year to get back to feeling 100% like they did before getting sick.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"TSA officers confiscated a record number of guns at airport checkpoints in 2022, agency officials announced Tuesday.
The Transportation Security Administration said they discovered 6,542 firearms over the course of the year, 570 more than was found in 2021, which previously held the record.
The agency reported that 88% of the guns they confiscated were loaded at the time.
All those guns can be a costly mistake for travelers. In December, TSA raised the fines for carrying a gun through airport security because of the increase through 2022.
Previously, an unloaded gun carried a fine between $1,500 and $2,475 and a criminal referral, while a loaded gun found at airport security could lead to a fine between $3,000 and $10,000.
For the 241 guns found in the last two weeks of the year, the maximum fine for a loaded gun could be as much as $14,950. Repeat offenders could rack up fines for even more, according to the agency's website."
Yeah. We take this stuff very, very seriously.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
C M Keep telling yourself what you want to hear, just like CNN, MSNBC. At least Moore doesn't make that mistake.
Had Trump sounded the alarm the first WEEK of February (okay, too much to ask, of him), OR if he has not systematically undermined and flouted public health measures (still too much to ask), OR if he had come out of his own COVID case with some humanity, and MADE SURE we'd have stimulus and access to quality treatments, he would have won.
As it is, you sound like a liberal excuse-maker: "I'm not responsible!!! My hands were tied by The Bad People!!!!!! Why did they DO this, to MEEEEE?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
di C Well, you're being kind. I readily admit I did not grasp that Saagar's mention of the Nixon transition (or so I thought, yikes) and Ryan Grim's explication of what Nixon actually did before the election referred to the same event. All I can say now is wow.
Timelines matter -- for me, in missing it, but even moreso for the analysis. "Transition" and "prior to an election" are two very different animals.
I'm not saying it's a big deal because by all appearances I was duped, but because it really is. No wonder our politics are what they are.
I was looking forward to the Flynn hearings, I thought the district judge was brilliant. Enough of lying! Under oath no less, during a plea hearing. And if this was an FBI setup, all the more reason to expose it. Let all chips fall where they may. Because the FBI does this to people without Flynn's resources, and routinely gets away with it. No wonder Flynn got pardoned. The whole scenario was about to be played out in open court, can't have that!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@michigandersea3485 Your post stayed on my mind for several days because it is brilliant. Your daughter is very lucky to have you as a father and she is going to be one very happy young lady someday. What really strikes me about your plan is that high school was supposed to prepare everyone for a good job. That's what it was supposed to do -- and it once did. Bravo for not being passive in the face of deteriorating education. Once she has that solidly in place, why not major in art history, if it's truly her passion? Exactly!
One other thing that struck me, living outside the US for five years, and later teaching as a community college adjunct (not my main job), is that people really underestimate what good decisionmaking, planning, and most of all hard work can do. Too many people believe in some sort of inborn talent, and think things should be easy, or the person must not be "good" at them. This is so wrong. They completely underestimate what an extra 30 or 40 minutes a day can do, when practiced over a period of many years. That's the difference between not understanding math and breezing through introductory calculus. I'm serious, it really is.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@leomessifans I'm thinking I have to spell it out: I think ALL of this is a disaster. I think anyone who has become inured to accepting it -- as MANY have -- is fooling themselves in ways they cannot foresee at the moment, because most people have no idea what is going on in the big, wide world, or how much it can and will affect us.
Case in point: read The Jakarta Method. Then do some serious study of how much we supported Islamic fundamentalist extremists to oppose leftists, even democratic, Euro-style leftists, all over the world -- leftists we have long accepted in the governments of our closest allies. Then think about how much money we owe everyone else at this moment (trade deficit, national debt in foreign hands), and then count up our military bases all over the planet, and think about what they are there for. Does all this look good to you? Or, do you prefer to take sides over two candidates who are both a disgrace, and unqualified to be small town mayors?
Go for it. You may not have the luxury forever. Enjoy while it lasts. :/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@drewskij2175 Except that we revise our views of history as new information comes to light, just as we revise our views of current events as new information comes to light. There's nothing pseudo about it. That is what historians do. The word "revisionist" is used as a signal to oppose whatever it is that is labeled that way, and to silence people -- no different from the way a whole host of words are used now: fascist, racist, anti-Semite, homophobe, transphobe, communist, Putin puppet, Assad apologist, tankie, anti-vaxxer, wow I've barely scratched the surface.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This author appears ignorant of basic facts of social psychology. For example, you will never get at the truth concerning whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group values the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth.
It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- whether you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully, or whether you can build yourself up a little -- and whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A researcher has to use various indirect methods to find out who is truly happy.
Do any of the people on Fox look happy to you? They are railing against someone or something at least as much as the clown show that is The View. Both are fact-challenged for some reason. The View may be worse, but the difference is small. That's the current media market.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Gretchen K. So, you're going to quote dictum from a case that has been overruled, and that does not apply here in any event. The New York Times malice standard applies here -- and even I agree that it creates too high a barrier for plaintiffs in defamation in the contemporary world. (But the First Amendment is under a lot of attack lately, so it may just be best to leave New York Times malice alone. C.f. recent dissents from denial of certiorari by Thomas and Gorsuch, however.) Speech and writing, like the allegedly defamatory article, is presumed to be First Amendment-protected, and it must be proved by clear and convincing evidence that it is not. (I.e., Depp in this case must prove it.) The old chestnut that "you can't evade the consequences of your speech" is true, and vague, and illuminates nothing. WHO should mete out the consequences? And WHAT should those consequences be?
You must not have ever practiced in this area. Don't get so angry. Pick up Nadine Strossen, or Chemerinsky.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@skontheroad I know what happened in that case. It's one of the worst examples of lawyering I've ever seen, starting with not fighting the jurisdiction and venue. It's useless to try to discuss this. Once Depp planted the defecation image in the jury's minds, the case was almost certainly lost. If that was false, he succeeded in smearing Heard and can never be held to account for it (it's not perjury if he, in his inebriated state, believed it, and she cannot sue him for defamation because sworn testimony is immune from suit). He did vow to destroy her, in an electronic communication made years ago. The real pity for the public is that they were misled, yet again, about what was going on: they were losing First Amendment rights, and for what? A relitigation of a sick divorce case? For the pleasure of stoning a disturbed woman who married a drugged up man? The multimillionaires and billionaires will be fine. Money will always be speech.
1
-
1
-
@skontheroad Here again, you are missing the point. Whether she was abusive to him as well, and whether she was in fact the primary abuser, has no relevance to the truth of the article. Did you read the article?
You know, if you really don't care about your rights, and if any abused husband believes the aftermath of Depp v. Heard will help him in any way whatsoever, I do not know what to tell you. Any case where a stereotype is disrupted should matter, one would think, stereotypes being that men abuse women but not vice versa (in the case of physical abuse, it appears to be three to one men abusing women, but that's still a substantial number of women abusing men; in the case of severe emotional abuse, it's definitely not that high, and could even tip toward women, though we don't have firm data). But I can tell you, that will not happen. Some men may threaten women with defamation, but they are likely to be bluffing, or very rich -- and if the latter, the estranged wife already knew what the guy could do to her. In short, this case will have no bearing in family court, where these issues are considered for the rest of us non-hundred-millionaires.
Refusing to wake up with the clock striking noon is really unattractive.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@moloney55 You missed the part where she pointed out --- correctly --- that Title VII has had so little effect because the lawsuits are prohibitively difficult to prove, or even to bring (meaning, to survive a motion to dismiss), regardless of merit. (If you had any notion of the EEOC procedural hurdles involved, not to mention the need for having a good $30k on hand to start, you would know this.) Employers know, and act accordingly. And if they spend a little money on counterproductive DEI nonsense, they have added a layer of protection.
As for the set theory "proof" you propose, that requires believing that the distribution of genuine merit in the two groups you've designated as sample pools is different. If it is THE SAME, then merit hiring is not undermined at all. (E.g., set up two sample pools of numbers containing an identical frequency of prime numbers and draw from each; you have the same chance of ending up with prime numbers as you did before.)
But if people just substitute one criterion for another, then yeah. The one substituted out, or put in second place, WILL suffer. No kidding. That was an unwarranted assumption on your part, huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@garrettolson5516 "Off-label compassionate use of medications, particularly in an emergency, is a very well-established practice, and is often the ethical thing to do. Or at least, it was. Ending that is not a good thing. Rethinking it, fine -- but then allow all of the doctors who were featured yesterday testifying before Congress to weigh in. They should be heard from first, because they were right."
They WERE right about the origins of the pandemic, the prudence of forcing vaccinations, particularly on the young, the effectiveness of the vaccines to stop transmission, the harms associated with locking down the world, the CENSORSHIP, and the need to study other approaches, which these studies prove was necessary, because you had no idea ab initio what would work and what would harm more than it helped.
Rethinking it, fine. Name calling is not thinking.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nealorr5086 If the plaintiffs-respondents win this case, they will certainly have injunctive relief. A tort claim for damages seems farfetched, but an expert on current law would need to take a hard look and see whether any such case could be brought, against anyone. For most of those who wronged the plaintiffs, they probably can't be held liable at all, or, if their actions do rise to that level, they would be granted immunity in this case.
If the Supreme Court entertains the government's argument, that means they didn't deliberately violate their oath. They had a good-faith belief they were upholding their oath, and happened to be wrong. That means immunity.
Have you ever heard of anyone going to jail for violating someone's First Amendment rights? No, huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@uggligr I'm sorry. I appreciate that now. It is assumed that everyone knows about it by now, because of all of the coverage it got as "Russian misinformation." Glenn Greenwald left The Intercept over being censored on this issue. His substack tells the whole story.
In short, Hunter Biden was suffering from drug problems, and he took his laptop in for repairs and forgot it. After a period of time, it allegedly became property of the repair shop, who shared it with Biden opponents. The contents of its hard drive became public, and includes horrible pictures and other material concerning Hunter, and also some cryptic emails and similar texts that seem to discuss kickbacks and include Joe. Its contents are being investigated. In the meantime, Hunter is suing. I'm not sure where these investigations, suits, etc., are going; I have not been following those
There is also a serious allegation that it was BIDEN who planted the story that the laptop was fake and that the Russians planted it, and that BIDEN asked the surveillance agencies to assert that it was "typical of Russian disinformation." An open letter to that effect was signed by about 50 or so such people (CIA, FBI, and so forth). This may have been illegal for Biden to do. Biden almost certainly knew it was real. In essence, it was Biden who asked the surveillance state to interfere in the election to prevent this material from being treated as real. The major networks all listened to the surveillance state and reported that the Russians planted it, probably.
Hunter never categorically denied it was real, and is now suing, which means he has to admit the laptop was his. He could still claim the data on it was compromised, I suppose (and I suppose it could have been, once he lost control of it); however, no evidence of tampering with the hard drive data has emerged so far.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therealcirclea762 All the Terrible Places you mention, where no one has "freedom," have higher higher life expectancy than the US. And of course less obesity, addiction, random, crazy violence, and general dysfunction. But if you can set up an enclave, go near-hermit, you certainly have a better "opportunity" to do that in the US. I mean, look at the Manson family, or the Unabomber. If they had just left other people alone, no problem.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@therealcirclea762 No, the court can appoint a lawyer to a case, usually from a panel of lawyers who agree to be available, but in principle any lawyer who is a member of the bar. If the lawyer does not want to take the case for any reason other than one recognized as presenting an ethical problem, he must petition the court for permission, and possibly even face reprimand. Not that reprimands usually happen, but that they could.
There are even crucial moments in a case where a lawyer cannot withdraw, either formally or simply by quitting, unless he is desperately ill or something, without risking his license to practice. This is true even in civil cases, even where the lawyer took the client himself and later wants to withdraw. This is true even when the client has stopped paying. The lawyer needs the judge's permission, which must be requested by motion and becomes part of the public record of the case. A client can always fire a lawyer. A lawyer cannot always quit a case. Even a fired lawyer has to submit a motion to withdraw, to the court, so it becomes part of the public record that the client fired him.
Look it up.
You did not understand the post. So why are YOU talking about someone else's IQ points?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@SlowPeace25 So then the owner of the car is a victim of karma, too. He's suspended from his job, he's being investigated for a homicide, and he may be prosecuted. And having a mere child interfere with his car is obviously karma. If he were a Good Person, no one would have touched his car, least of all a Child, because as we all know, Children are messengers from Higher Dimensions, revealing to us the Universal Essence, and teaching us about Who We Really Are.
I'm sorry you are on such a low Spiritual Plane, but I trust that your interaction with me will improve you. I mean, your interaction with Me will improve [you]. That's what I meant to say.
You're welcome! I love helping. :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
How do you know they were all due to irresponsibility?
I lived in a country with a perfect abortion law: elective only for the embryonic stage (seem to remember 10 weeks), with an affidavit to begin the process ("I, Marie DuPont, hereby declare that I am a mother in distress, . . . "), mandatory counseling, no same-day abortions, and if money was a factor in the woman's decision, she had to be sent home with a packet of information about welfare benefits to think it over some more. Medically necessary abortions were decided by three-doctor panels, and they were humane. No way would anyone deny Mrs. Cox, and the state paid 100%.
They cut abortions by between a quarter to a third. It was great.
France under a Socialist. Believe it. Of course, they later liberalized the law and ruined it. Figures.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@RossJacobs I didn't say the emails were authentic, and the story about how they were supposedly discovered is a hoot. Nor, as Glenn Greenwald pointed out, do the emails contain any "bombshells." (Does anyone doubt Hunter drops his dad's name for personal gain? Hardly evidence his father is involved, or even knows about any specific instance. In fact, it's a reasonable conjecture that Hunter hides a lot from dad.)
So "Russia" is your go-to? I thought you actually might have a reason to cite Russia, other than that the story worked well before, and it's a nice safety valve for American bigotry, which is about to explode. The more stories about the "Foreign Enemies" among us, the better. The hate has got to be deflected somewhere.
Censorship, and Section 230 immunity is the big story here. How do they all get to do whatever they like, and have blanket immunity all the same? Even newspapers have to be mindful of the "NYTimes malice" standard.
Krystal is correct in objecting to the disgusting hypocrisy -- though that is not news, either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@StinkFingerr Do people not know why affirmative action in college admissions was legal until yesterday? The legacy and donor pools are disproportionately whiter. Actually, what Kennedy hinted at in his tweet about affirmative action is legally accurate: affirmative action can be legal ONLY to correct past discrimination by the very actor who is now implementing affirmative action to make up for the harm they themselves did. (Not society, blah blah, but they themselves.)
The universities never argued that. (They argued the Bakke standard and so forth.) They never admitted that the affirmative action was to make up for discrimination. That's because they don't want to admit where the discrimination comes from: it comes from the legacy pool and donor pool, which they will NEVER give up. Not yesterday, not now, and not tomorrow. Instead of giving an opportunity to a deserving minority kid, they deployed the policy against Asians, and limited Asian enrollment.
I think the real problem is that the leaders of the country are drawn so disproportionately from these schools. After the college admissions scandal (and Jeffrey Epstein, the icing on the cake), you would think there would be some way to reduce their influence. It's not as though Michigan, Texas, Berkeley, Cal Tech, and U of Chicago cannot educate people. Quite the contrary.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@utah_koidragon7117 Well, this is just an anecdote, but it is true: when I went to a country where standardized testing cannot be used for school selection (it isn't legal), and that had super hard achievement testing for everything -- advancing in school, teaching, civil service, you name it -- I took the GRE under the worst conditions I have ever seen and made the top 99.9%, the best I ever did.
Anyone who works hard can get a perfect score in math, or close to it. The work it may take, and the time, is why people don't do it. Granted, it would take a couple of months for some, and a couple of years for someone else, I get it. But these are not tests to determine genius. The Asian kids get the scores by working for them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
What standard is it that elite, hyperrich white American males have to meet? If they get addicted, not to a legal drug, but cocaine, they are having "struggles." Fine. But just tell me, what do they have to do? I agree, legalize and treat, absolutely. Everyone deserves a chance. No, PLURAL chances. Everyone deserves many chances, no question. But once you have chances, is there some standard?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@JohnM-sw4sc In the late 1970s, no one finished college, then moved back in with their parents, with no savings and a pile of student loan debt. No one. It did not happen, barring serious illness -- and even then, it was unusual. Occasionally, brothers, sisters, or first cousins would team up to split the rent. That's as "bad" as it got.
College was hard, in-state tuition was nearly free, and graduation meant something. People worked summers to pay for their full year of tuition, fees, books, and supplies. And were very proud of themselves, rightly so. Nor did you need college for most jobs. Not even trade school was always essential -- companies trained you, paid apprenticeships trained you. Now, college + internships, with barely a stipend?? That you spend on commuting, lunch, and a new computer, if that? (And trade school loans are even more likely to default than college loans, last I heard. At least they are smaller.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This is true. Not only that, but when it comes to significant viral illnesses, the typical pattern for women is to have a less severe illness, but a LONGER period of time to full recovery. Men get sicker, and, at the same level of illness, get well quicker.
This is true of flu, of meningitis, of pneumonia, of mononucleosis, of hepatitis . . . and it is NOT NEW. You are absolutely correct.
When you combine the biological facts with all the mental stress, gaslighting, forcing vaccines on people who do not need them because they are young and have recovered from a case of COVID, etc., yeah, I'm not surprised that women are having a worse time. Feeling "socially unacceptable" is generally a bigger problem for women, sad to say.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Pan-Britannic Traditionalist Conservative Absolutely. The major investment banks were being offered annual bonuses sufficient to set their principals and their principals' children up for life, and were screaming, "no, NO!!" but government forced them to take the money. It even forced banks in Germany, Iceland, and lots of other places to trade in exotic derivatives and swaps. They all screamed no, but, alas . . . Same thing happened with LIBOR, the repo market, HSBC money laundering, recent market manipulation, etc., etc. They all keep saying no, the government keeps forcing them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@naasking "The brain as information processor," which in turn is posited as explaining the whole of consciousness, is not uncontroversial, to say the least. I find it interesting that in order to examine consciousness, Penrose starts with the experimental observation that under anesthesia, we become unconscious, and then as we are brought out of anesthesia, our consciousness is restored to us. Any of this other stuff that talks about consciousness being reducible to observable behaviors that include claims about have consciousness, or "uploading" our disembodied consciousness, reminds me of a new version of Skinner, and we all know how that was demolished.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nolitetebastardescarborund9761 Yeah, well, French swearing is saltier, and more concrete, shall we say? I know it's toned down in translation. The literal translation is what I said, and people use that verb in other expressions. They know its literal meaning.
French has a register of strong language that is just shy of swearing, and it's quite colorful. There's a substantial vocabulary in French consisting of expressions comparable to the British "bloody mess." Americans don't have too much like it. What we did have was highly gendered, homophobic, etc., and can no longer be used, for good reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LA Seriously no self-reflection. I consider it beneath childish to attack people rather than deal with their ideas. You have, in black and white, precisely what I think of her views, and either you don't read, or you don't understand what I wrote, for reasons I that are opaque to me. Refusing to denounce her is not cheering her. Maybe you should find the article in the NYTimes that I mentioned, it might be a reality check. You're seeing everything in terms of personalities. I don't understand how this happened. Do you not see how this approach is not working? Glenn Greenwald just posted two videos on Ukraine that are not policy positions but methodology positions -- they are a plea for cooler heads, and for understanding and resisting emotionalism.
I just said Iverson recently made a video where she said Putin has larger, more sinister long range aims that include undermining the West. SHE said that. Thus, you see that possibility, too. You agree on that point.
I don't understand why you don't see that this is not a time for name calling, that this is serious now. I think you do, or you wouldn't bother talking to me!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@LordLewsTheDragon All but the part about racial disparities is false or tendentious. And you're cooking the books, too. The total number of people who go to college today, which includes community college, is 40%. You also seem to assume that they want to go, as opposed to having to go because there are no good jobs for them. (You think there is a sudden passion for majoring in business, the top major for three decades now? Or is it demonstration of docility?) Jim Crow ended in the 1960s, and in 1970, the mass incarceration had not yet begun (or, in some cases, resumed).
You seem to think the size of an apartment indicates more freedom than the ability to leave school debt-free, join with a friend, or get married, and take off to live wherever you wanted -- New York, Seattle, San Francisco, Denver, it didn't matter. It was up to you. Why is that a fair tradeoff? I don't see what's so great about having a space that's bigger, but you're stuck there, with fewer people than ever before.
You also seem to think that technology has not contributed to a dystopia where you yourself can't move very freely unless you are very wealthy, but a mob can follow you around the globe and destroy your reputation and your prospects, in perpetuity, and the state and private conglomerates can find out anything they want about you, without a warrant -- or worse yet, use a computer program to profile you and manipulate you without your knowledge or consent, so that it is not even you who anyone is interacting with, it is their two-dimensional construct of you, providing them with just enough information to get you to do what they want. I'm omitting the ease with which a person receives death threats now, and the number of guns per person. Those have too many causes to unravel, but the trend is not wonderful.
Also, look into the use of militarized SWAT teams. Those used to be used rarely.
I would like to compare our infant mortality and maternal mortality of today with that of Sweden or France 30 to 50 years ago, and to compare trend lines as well, and then to see what it is by race and class. That would be instructive. Is the huge increase in autism, ADHD, and even childhood bipolar disorder real? Gender dysphoria, too? The increase in diagnosis certainly is, but that could be part of the medicalization of childhood -- many psychiatrists sincerely believe so. Then there is also the issue of healthy lifespan; end of life has become a nightmare for far too many. The bare numbers hide more than they inform.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@soapdispens3r It is illegal to use deadly force in defense of mere property, everywhere. Lethal force is justified if you put any person at risk of imminent physical harm. It is never legal for defense of mere property. Social ills, etc., are irrelevant. The age of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Whether he put a person in danger of physical harm is the only question that matters. It is a bright line. We have a lot of gun owners in America, and this isn't common knowledge? Wow, just wow.
Also, this is exactly why a carjacking, or a home invasion while there are people in the house, can be met with lethal force. It doesn't matter if the assailant turns out to be unarmed, or was just looking to burgle and thought the house was empty, or was in middle school. There is no question about this. It's called self-defense for a reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Who's lying? If I report that Trump states X and X is a lie, or that Trump's lawyers say X and X is a lie, did I just lie?
If I report that the White House asserts that the Nordstream pipeline was destroyed by Russian agents, and that turns out to be false, did I lie? If I report that leaders of the DNC believe Trump was elected in 2016 because of Russian state interference in our election, and that turns out to be false, did I lie? Or did I accurately report what members of the DNC stated?
Your final paragraph is just a new anti-free-speech slogan. Congrats, please do destroy the last good thing left. The Fourth Amendment is gone, the Fifth, almost gone, the Eighth . . . well, at least we don't execute people for what they did as minors. I guess that's something. Kalief Browder is not here to tell his side, however.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I don't want my money going to finance any private scheme where I have no voice, and should have no voice. If we are going to unfund universal, PUBLIC education, then I want my cut back, to use it for me. I'll spend it on night school. I'm not going to fund charters, private, and all that, for only some, and where there is no possibility of democratic control. As I said, as a matter of principle, I have nothing to say about what happens in these schools, nor should I. But then you can't have my money.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@James Herndon Wow. You sound like a University of Chicago person. I don't know what night school options, or special certification, or alternatve education stuff they offer right now, but I can't imagine your liking anything below that level. I mean, if you ever need the piece of paper to make it official.
Chicago (the city) is the best kept secret for higher education. Everyone knows about either coast, when SAIC is where the single most influential dean of the Yale art school got his MFA. "What can a person do with an ART degree?" Well, the only real rags to riches story I know was an art major, who went into advertising but later was sorry to have spent his whole life in that field. I know someone who graduated from SAIC this year, a former (nearly lifelong) Marine before that. Started his own business and has a new job right now, plans to open his own gallery some day. And has made art during the pandemic shutdowns. Also knows how to set up cable and Internet, weld, and make furniture by hand. He's a good actor, too. He's a doer.
Some of the schools in Chicago are world-class, and the ambiance is generally more sensible and serious. Maybe NYC has as many options. I doubt that anywhere else in the States is comparable. A lot of schools have become a four-year camp for the immature, true enough, and they don't even teach free discussion. BUT there are ways around that. Lots!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@apethae1 I have worked in both as well, and you may not realize it, but you just proved my point. Of course people are pushed out of their jobs -- in academia, and in the private corporation, in precisely the way you've just described. It's practically a human algorithm by now, and it works like a charm. Of course certain people are protected -- in business and in politics. (Harvey Weinstein sure lasted a LONG time and had many, many friends, until the winds changed and his films started flopping.)
The central point is, in business, no one has First Amendment rights. You can get fired for expressing your views, even outside the workplace, and it is legal to do so in the private sector. In academia, this, too, is more and more the case, and the reason comes down to a very similar mindset. (I will bet that the tenured faculty in the fistfight was either a political animal extraordinaire, or a "star," with lots of publications and name recognition. He was not a run-of-the-mill tenured prof.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Buttlather Well, the poorest neighborhoods where I live have unbelievably bad basic services. You see dangerous empty dwellings, you see broken sidewalks and potholed streets, you see apartments so far below code that they are dangerous and catching fire all the time -- and of course the first thing anyone does is blame the residents, who usually had nothing to do with it. Then the concept of food desert is real --- whenever a nice store opens in a neighborhood close to a poor area, you will see very poor people buying groceries, even at Whole Foods when they have sales. Liquor stores, convenience stores, and small storefront churches, empty lots, broken sidewalks, impassable streets, broken street lights, flooded streets, lead pipes . . . and why? Why would one part of the same city have new schools, sidewalks, streets, and street cleaning every month?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jasonmataafa5983 EVERY single developed country found a way to provide all of those things for its people, and for that matter, in 1970, in-state tuition at all the premier public universities was something a kid could earn with a minimum-wage summer job. Then, when you graduated debt-free, all you'd need to do was to team up with a couple of roommates and you could afford an apartment in Brooklyn or Queens, or even Manhattan, not to mention anywhere on the West coast. Health insurance was cheap.
There was once a time when none of this was an issue, and now it's insurmountable for most people. You need to take a hard look at what changed.
On a side note, when universities were affordable, calculus and Shakespeare and foreign languages were typical college subjects --- as were Nietzsche and Marx, for that matter. Now we're debating identities and pronouns.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@fredschnerbert1238 How do we pay for Medicare for the elderly, who need the most medical care? How did in-state tuition used to be something that was covered by a minimum-wage summer job? Yes, a year at U of Michigan, or UC Berkeley, or U of Texas, and on and on and on. When you figure that out, come back to us.
Health insurance issues are the number one reason people hesitate to start a small business. School debt, and not just for college but for a whole host of vocational programs, is a major reason kids live at home instead of getting on with life, getting married, etc. But you worry about "TAXES!!!!!" Great, keep it up.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@djinghiskhan9199 CDC: "During January 1-December 31, 2023, a total of 58 measles cases were reported by 20 jurisdictions: California, Colorado, District of Columbia, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kentucky, Maryland, Missouri, New Jersey, New York City, Ohio, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Texas, Utah, Virginia, Washington, and Wisconsin." This is due to anti-vaxxers?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Snipergoat1 Oh, advertisers are amoral! And they do damage! Not only that, but lobbies and pressure groups lie and bribe to get their way. Fancy that, it never occurred to me.
If the only damage they do is to the revenues of a multi-billionaire, that would be one thing. In fact, such groups have been behind every sort of manipulation and atrocity. The "science" of shaping attitudes and behavior has reached dizzying heights. If a small group of well-placed masters of propaganda wanted a world war before this decade is over, the chances are far from negligible that we would have one. And everyone who mouthed their slogans would think they were coming up with something original. I assure you, they would.
I know you think you've "got me" or something, but I don't even get your point. Suppose Musk sued and won. Would a court order ADL to cease and desist? Would advertisers be obligated in any way to come back to X/Twitter? (Would they do it of their own volition, based only on the outcome of a lawsuit? Ha.) No. Money would change hands. Money. If you see some higher principle at work here, please be clearer. I actually don't understand. I'm not being pigheaded, I actually don't.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@4foxsake571 It doesn't work for several reasons: privatization of public goods always undermines the public goods. See, e.g., Adam Smith on the rentier class, not to mention the privatization of the commons of his time. Second, MUCH of the charter school experiment has ended up in looting of public monies. The best informed parents make grave mistakes, and children have to meet educational milestones every year (as we've just seen) --- they simply cannot afford failed experiments. Third, and related, the quality of charter schools and established private schools is extremely variable, possibly more so than the quality of public schools in a single tax district. No one can deny that the very best are outstanding, but the worst are nightmares. So, the fate of minors again depends on who their parents are, how much money they already have to support academic achievement, and how well informed they are, plus a hefty dose of sheer luck?
The New York City public schools and City Colleges educated generations of immigrant children to the highest achievement. Look at what was different then. Not just school, but the culture of school. Who upholds that now? The people on top are the most clever liars. Integrity is for chumps. You think the kids don't notice?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@graywalkerjoin3rdparty74 You think that being held liable and having your assets seized is not a punishment? Yes it is. It is a civil penalty. Second, Depp has the means to obtain the BEST legal counsel in the world, but somehow subjected himself to the British court system, and his lawyers were unable to warn him about what you just informed us of. How did that happen? If he lost work AFTER losing a defamation suit, by what rights do you imagine he is entitled to compensation? He subjected himself to a foreign court system, lost, and as a result, had contracts cancelled. That's not a result of the article, it is a result of a court case. By the way, this case is not about persons, it is about a writing. Have you read the article alleged to have been defamatory? Just curious.
The deeper issue here is that we are turning into little mobs at the drop of a hat. I saw through MeToo. I knew it had rapidly deteriorated into a mob. It hurt men without protecting women. Depp v. Heard is doing the opposite, and it has unleashed a more ferocious mob. Will things get worse before they get better? I don't want to contemplate that. At some level I cannot understand, I really cannot.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@varsityathlete9927 Well, that's true, but . . . Discussing some sort of parental alert, comparable to the system for rating films, and having a small label on various media (music, video games) does not strike me as a prioir censorship. It can devolve into that, true. But if done correctly, it can also just be information. Look what happened in film: the R rating broadened far beyond what anyone would have predicted. No movie that is not totally porn is ever rated X. I agree with that, by the way. But back in 1950, did anyone think Midnight Cowboy and Boogie Nights would be R? Good that they aren't X, but . . . It's kind of funny.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@utah_koidragon7117 Not at all. I said that there are objective reasons to watch her more closely, but certainly not to draw any conclusions. I actually mean what I say, and I don't engage in slogans like "plausible deniability." (I, unlike you, have no need to.) You claim you know she cannot possibly be a fascist, and has said nothing that could cause anyone to take a closer look? Have you or your parents ever lived in Europe, Italy in particular, but elsewhere where there were allies or collaborationists, with the Axis? Never mind, the answer is obvious. You are breathtakingly monolingual and monocultural, and beholden to parroting your local crowd. Too bad your country is so well-armed and run by nefarious elites.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jackgranger6539 The prosecution is alleging more than that. Or at least that's what I'm seeing. They claim Rittenhouse's presence with that firearm strapped to him and his engagement with the crowd was itself provocative, and that no one should have come to Kenosha openly carrying an assault-style firearm. This is not such a weak argument because the average person in Kenosha probably doesn't want juveniles running around openly carrying firearms. But that isn't really the standard, or at least not exactly. It's not whether that crowd "felt" provoked, or how strongly they felt it, but whether a reasonable, law-abiding person would have been provoked by Rittenhouse's presence and actions given all the circumstances, and whether the provocation was not something Rittenhouse is permitted to do at will. (So, for example, even if traumatizing me is not a crime, if I could maintain a lawsuit against him for traumatizing me, then he wasn't acting lawfully. But it's not about MY feelings, it's about whether a reasonable person would have been traumatized by what he did. The standard has got to be objective, there has got to be a threshold. How bad the trauma felt by me goes to damages, but that's only after the objective standard is met.)
For Rittenhouse, his actual state of mind is relevent. His fear for his life has to have had a reasonable basis in the facts, true, but how he perceived the threat does matter. In self-defense, the intent is to preserve one's own life, and that is not illegal. You can't create the circumstances that led to the need to use lethal force to defend your life, and you can't act recklessly in defending your life, but your intent to stay alive is blessed by the law. So it's not really symmetric.
We really are supposed to presume innocence and prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. I wish we always did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@andrewdegeorge9649 Well, this dictator who invaded another country just scored another coup, and not incidentally, one that is good for his economy and not good for the dollar: scores of countries want to join BRICS, and among the six that will join soon are Argentina, Ethiopia, and Egypt, not to mention the Saudis. Mexico has expressed interest in joining, and Turkey (a NATO member) is interested in the proposed currency, if and when it is issued.
Your mainstream media is leading you down a primrose path. For the record, I am opposed to Putin, but facts are facts. I was surprised that this happened during the war. Ponder that. I thought the war was causing the BRICS to fray. One would think so, huh? Oops.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@ffffnnnnul2125 Except that it's wrong.
Major corporations spend more on LOBBYING than they pay in taxes. And rather than paying taxes, and reducing the federal deficit, they buy Treasuries and get paid INTEREST, from the federal government, which means those very same tax revenues they are able to avoid.
In the meantime, it is they who need the court system (and its police power) to assert their intellectual property rights and thrash out their contract claims, it is they who need 700 bases in 80 countries to police the global shipping lanes and prop up the dollar as global reserve currency . . . get it? Just keep looking.
This stuff isn't too tough to understand.
You could start by taking a look at what was done by the government during the pandemic, and who profited the most, as well as how each little decision seemed to have an independent, "scientific" basis, but all of them together pointed in one direction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@penelopelopez8296 I know how you feel. All I can say, honestly, is find refuge in a much-loved hobby, a person, sports or solitary exercise, hiking, biking, one of the arts, and above all, read every day. Read in more than one language. You can shed this feeling.
Also, these people are not worth your agony. I'm not saying to ignore the world and where it's going. I'm saying don't let it get to you to this point. They are not worth it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Kurgana Here's a hint: who are the students appealing to, to ban this speaker? The authorities. But the authorities in this case are clearly state actors, and cannot curtail constitutionally protected speech based on objections to its content. In your own home, there is no way anyone can frame that as coming from the state. You're not a state actor, you're exercising your right to free association. And you don't have to have anything to do with Pence.
If people actually listened to this whole video, the main points are all there. I'm no fan of Robbie's, I find him childish and smug, but everything he said was right.
Anyway, college has become a trade school with some fancy resort properties put at the students' disposal. Maybe they shouldn't bother inviting anybody to speak unless it's for career advice, stock tips, etc. People begged to make university more like a private business, where as we all know speech is severely curtailed. Business was considered the ideal model. Well here we are.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@speckledmike PROVE SOMEONE SAID PRECISELY THAT. Sounds like something you read into something someone said.
But more important, how do you suggest the sexualization of children be stopped? Exactly how do you communicate the message effectively? Did you know, for example, that beauty pageants for toddlers, complete with swimsuit competitions, exist? Did you know dance competitions for preteens that imitate adult erotic dancers exist? Do you have proposals for doing something about it? Do you think you can do something about it without showing what it consists in? You cannot legally ban a movie if the distributor sues under the First Amendment to lift the ban, without showing the whole movie to a jury.
This is apart from whether such competitions "normalize pedophilia." You say so, without any evidence. But they are certainly not good for kids, even if they lead to nothing worse. I don't need persuading.
I think anyone who endorses first person shooter video games for kids under 18 is endorsing something that harms brain development and normalizes homicide, but I don't expect to convince anyone, sadly. Applying a slander term to them never occurred to me. Quick and dirty, huh?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Back to the central question: no, these are not wonderful times, and homelessness and drug abuse should tell you that.
Fifty years ago, minimum wage jobs covered rent, medical care, and in-state tuition literally everywhere in the country. This gave people opportunities to become educated, live where they want, and try out different jobs without being petrified of debt or even ending up on the street. The top four quintiles in income had a chance. Now, only the top quintile does; in fact, only the top 10% is truly secure.
Silicon Valley and Wall Street have not provided us with a better life. They have provided us with a financialized service economy and mass surveillance, plus advertising we can no longer spot and defend ourselves against. When people are always watched and don't make real things, count on lying to be a major job description. No, it's not good. And I haven't even touched on the political class, or the pandemic.
Also, if you've ever lived in different cities with different levels of inequality, you know from experience that less inequality is better. Some inequality is normal; San Francisco level makes no sense. No job is worth 10,000 times more than any other. Work isn't organized that way.
1
-
@christopherleslie Yes, of course I looked at data. First of all, nearly everyone either had one roommate or was married, and sometimes, people had more than one roommate. That means that two people sharing an apartment spent well under 25% of total earnings for rent. To live alone comfortably, it is true a person would need to make about $3.00, hardly out of reach for a high school grad. But people were convivial, and didn't want to live alone.
$1.75 per hour, 40 hours per week (the norm) meant that within 10 to 12 weeks, you earned a full year of in-state tuition and fees. In other words, the lowliest summer job covered it, for an entire school year, in-state, exactly as I said.
No one lived with their parents because of a lack of money, or because of debt for college. It was either a choice, or the result of some illness or disability. A college grad was a free human being.
I personally know people who did it. We haven't even started to talk about the intense pride that working your own way through school brought to a teenager, and what the freedom to live wherever you wanted, in a vast country, without needing a TRUST FUND, meant. The exhilaration can't be captured in numbers. But you didn't even do the math. You just eyeballed it.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Actually, no one can teach you that. But they can at least point you in that direction, making it more likely that you will grasp it for yourself.
The problem is, no one wants to take those courses: calculus, real analysis, abstract algebra, set theory, topology, and serious foreign language and linguistics courses, including a classical language.
Bertrand Russell is always good, to illustrate the trajectory of a brilliant person's thought, and what he did upon discovering some of his most cherished ideas were wrong..
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@utah_koidragon7117 That isn't what happened. The major difference is in the state tax support for higher education. I will agree that regulations have caused an explosion in the size of college administrative costs, which have mostly harmed education. The small benefits some regulations provided could have been accomplished at very low cost. At any rate, that is the second most important cause of skyrocketing costs, after the withdrawal of state tax support. Then, there are also the dubious building programs at so many schools that have increased costs. (Does every state school need a luxury sports arena? Really?)
Minimum wage certainly was a living wage. I once lived on it with one roommate.
Who works their way through college now? In four to five years? They cannot be in school full time and working enough hours to cover both. It can be done over a somewhat longer time frame, yes, but not on the usual schedule. The least expensive state school near me graduates people on average after 7 years, and offers a lot of night classes. Most students who go there live at home, and they have their degrees by age 25 or so, which is not so bad. It's easy to continue for a Master's also, which is good. The more expensive state schools all require loans.
1
-
1
-
@fritzforsthoefel8031 All of those high skilled workers depend very heavily on the "low skilled." Who do you think provides child care, elder care, taxi service, landscaping, pizza, coffee? Who picks the crops and delivers them? Who do you think cleans office buildings, schools, hospitals, shopping centers, airports, and commuter trains to the suburbs? Who do you think picks up all the high rise garbage, not to mention medical waste? Who makes sure the sewage goes where it's supposed to? None of that can be outsourced to China, yo.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@vincentschicchi4647 You know what? It's just another push toward private schools, as if we needed one more.
Public school kids need to be sure that the AP classes they take, and the AP exams they pass, really do lead to college credits. If it turns out that almost no college will accept this AP exam for credit, then it should be scraped, because it is misleading. If colleges do give credit for it, as promised to the kids who take the class, then leave them alone. Politicians are not experts on curriculum, but they can enforce basic "truth in advertising." They should not be censoring, and they should care whether public school kids get the same opportunities as private school kids, as much as possible. That is their real job.
I would bet anything DeSantis never read those authors. Nor did he look into the objective value of the curriculum for obtaining college credit -- and warning people if there is an objective problem. (That serves all "sides.") Then Whoopie Goldberg is even more ignorant. She sounds like she has no notion of what the issue is, and just wants to push something that sounds like it agrees with her biases. We already know what an expert on history she is. /s
Everyone in this picture is making bank. Do you see them, er, working?
Pandering, more like, for their own advantage.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@marcusmilling5296 First of all, higher infant and maternal mortality certainly DO have a very large effect on overall life expectancy; life expectancy does not fall on a normal curve, hence the mean life expectancy is, well, not very meaningful (the mean is informative only where you have a normal curve, so that both median and mode are close to the mean). Second, what matters is life expectancy at retirement age, not at birth. Consult an actuarial table for that, like the ones the life insurance companies use.
Plato lived to 80, Sophocles to 90; the human lifespan has been what it is for millennia. In their cases, longevity could very well have been thanks to their diet and the mountains, seas, clean water and air around Attica, plus the custom of walking, and practicing gymnastics for life.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Giovanni Magz The first one pertains to what I consider comparable to a crime against humanity, so if I must pick one, that one has got to be the most odious.
Since you obviously, and rightly, hate Trump's lies, then you must agree with me that to emulate him in any manner, however slightly, and to give his (frequently crazed, and often dangerous) supporters any reason to doubt the news media concerning the truth about Trump and his habitual lying, is the wrong road to take. It's wrong to do, and it won't work.
Isn't that what you mean? Yeah. Thought so.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
False premise. It is illegal to use deadly force in defense of mere property, in every state. Lethal force is justified if you put any person at risk of imminent physical harm. It is never legal for defense of mere property. Social ills, etc., are irrelevant. The age of the perpetrator, time of day, etc., all irrelevant. Whether he put a person in imminent danger of physical harm is the only question that matters.
Also, this is exactly why a carjacking, or a home invasion while there are people in the house, can be met with lethal force. It doesn't matter if the assailant turns out to be unarmed, or was just looking to burgle and thought the house was empty, or was "only a kid." There is no question about this. It's called self-defense for a reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Correct, this war came out of Nowhere, I mean Putin's Mind, sorry, and anyone who questions that is a stone psycho. DO NOT, I repeat, Do Not read Jonathan Cook, Chris Hedges, Aaron Mate, Abby Martin, Glenn Greenwald, etc., etc.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Buttlather Constitutional rights are something that cannot be taken away from you, by ANYONE in the elected government, at any level, without amending the Constitution. You have the right to decline to exercise them. You have the right to try to persuade others not to exercise them. The right to use birth control, including forms of birth control that may prevent a zygote from being implanted, falls under that very same analysis. A lot of religions oppose artificial birth control. Some even frown on rhythm. They have a right to advocate for their view, but not to criminalize those who disagree. . . . Well, now the state gets to run your life in one more way, and by "state," that almost always means the richer lobby. And you think it's progress!
Tell me, were you fooled by the vaccine mandates? How about the Poor Johnny Depp uproar (a First Amendment case)? Or did you want Brian Laundrie's parents to be forced to give up their Fifth Amendment rights, "for Gabby?" How come I saw through all of it -- and ALL of it goes in one direction. You lose rights, and you feel sure ("feel," the operative word) that something else happened. Something good for society.
It would be 🤣, but it's not.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Papadoc1000 Do you know what the most common degree is in, by far? Business, for at least 30 years. (A Business degree is at least 40% propaganda -- and that's assuming they took advanced accounting and mathematics If they didn't, it's worse.) The next category is the health sciences, with Nursing at the top. You know nothing about the humanities, absolutely nothing. I can tell. Hardly anyone studies them. (Actually, three people in this segment, including Emma and Kim, majored in Philosophy.)
As if you've taken a course on Plato, or Shakespeare. Please, spare me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@utah_koidragon7117 Not at all. You can vote and petition and argue for any law, such as a tax, or Social Security, to be changed -- just as we are doing now. The Social Security Trust Fund is not invested in the stock market. Government programs may have some features of contracts, but they actually are not. When it comes to freedom of contract, such as you have to buy a given stock or to decline to buy that stock or any stock, if government creates an obligation for individuals to do that, it is probably an infringement on the right of contract under the Constitution.
Could they get around that? They could get around most things, yeah. Some want vaccine mandates, others, investment mandates . . . How did we live without all this?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@TNerd The opposite is true. At Stanford, Chicago, or an Ivy, Gender Studies can lead to a very solid MFA, MBA, MPA, MSW program, or law school. Or PhD, where you WILL get tenured. At community college, take math and science. Tons and tons, every math they offer. Get certified in something, as a backstop. Gender Studies is for Stanford people. They will get HR jobs in Silicon Valley. (Alas? :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nottheonlydreamer9512 You fell for that, too? Here, I can't blame you. All three university presidents FAILED to stand up to religious harassment on campus, FAILED to take a clear stand on free speech, and FAILED to explain exactly how and why the First Amendment applies to the unique setting of a private college campus. When they should have been eloquent, they were diffident, smug, and barely coherent.
But all things considered, don't take the bait. What is going on, and what they want you to think is going on, are two different things as usual.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
False. It is illegal to use deadly force in defense of mere property, everywhere. Lethal force is justified if you put any person at risk of imminent physical harm. It is never legal for defense of mere property. Social ills, etc., are irrelevant. The age of the perpetrator is irrelevant. Whether he put a person in danger of physical harm is the only question that matters.
It is a bright line. We have a lot of gun owners in America, and this isn't common knowledge? Wow, just wow.
Also, this is exactly why a carjacking, or a home invasion while there are people in the house, can be met with lethal force. It doesn't matter if the assailant turns out to be unarmed, or was just looking to burgle and thought the house was empty, or was only 13. There is no question about this. It's called self-defense for a reason.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@beautifully_scarred_lea Let's see exactly what she has to say when confronted with the plain facts of what these drugs do to a child, as explained by someone who knows and is not afraid to speak up. Yeah, I'd like to hear it. (I'm not sure she's aware. As Blaire said, you see pictures of pregnant "transmen" quite regularly. And now we all have to say "pregnant people.")
What I am sure I personally heard Briahna say is that if the "gender affirming care" is made illegal, then that forecloses all discussion and debate -- which would be authoritarian. I wonder if she knows what has been going on around the country with the explosion of dangerous hormones being prescribed to minors. If all you have seen is the Frontline documentary on the subject, you would see no reason at all for any law banning gender affirming care. The cases that documentary focused on all had a clear need for something more than counseling, and where any medication was concerned, they were counseled to "take it slow." That was a tiny number of kids, not the explosion we have seen over the last few years.
I'm with you on the substance, by the way. I find it very suspicious that we have gone from vaccine mandates for children to this. I think it's criminal.
(Actually, France did make asking a minor about their vaccine status a crime. Of course no mandates for minors are permitted. Seriously, it's illegal there. I love it.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
That anyone could still believe what you just said . . . you strung together every cliche that still exists, and that has been disproven in every major financial panic over the last 150+ years.
A billion dollars at age 32 is like accumulating $85,500 a day -- from birth. Explain how, say, an "essential service" like Facebook can "earn" that. Well, I can explain it: at its inception, it functioned as the most effective combination of advertising and surveillance -- corporate and government -- ever devised, and the users themselves participated willingly, but not with informed consent.
Anyway, yawn. I don't know about "human nature," but the nature of your character gives me pause. I only hope you are paid to post, and in the present economy I can grudgingly respect that. Otherwise, it's unfathomable.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@mrx2062 Chief Justice Boatright, Justice Samour, and Justice Berkenkotter basically agree that the Colorado election code was designed to provide a summary, expedited procedure to decide simple questions, such as whether a proposed candidate was old enough to be inaugurated president. It cannot be use to make a Fourteenth Amendment, Section 3 determination. Basically, what the other four Justices decided violates Due Process.
I think everyone should at least try to read this, to see how technical and abstract these issues REALLY are, and how they don't lend themselves to social media polls, or off-the-cuff MSM comments. You can be sure none of the talking heads, or the "experts" on either side, read the whole case before commenting. They just took sides.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@travisbickle1689 Actually, you are a lawyer but not an "attorney at law." That distinction is outdated, and few recognize it as such today, but I do know it exists and people do use "attorney at law" in ads, on business cards, etc. That's why. Once you pass the bar, you are an attorney at law for life unless they disbar you. What you do with it is your business. Retire, let the license lapse, etc., you know whether you can practice or not, or if you don't, you will find out the hard way.
Law is pedantic. :/
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
This dude, whatever his name is, is ignorant of basic facts of social psychology. For example, you will never get at the truth of whether a person is happy; what you will find out is whether their social group valorizes the assertion that they are happy, or considers claiming to be discontented a signal of greater depth, intelligence, higher ethical standards, and so forth. It also depends on whether a group considers candor imperative -- you owe it to everyone to answer a survey truthfully -- and whether it is considered immoral, or even sinful, not to express happiness, which is a sign of gratitude toward God. So . . . A researcher has to use various indirect methods to find out who is truly happy.
Do any of the people on Fox look happy to you? They are railing against someone at least as much as The View.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jorgegonzales9815 Sorry, but you didn't understand what I meant, and you don't understand evidence. Sworn testimony, if offered, that you were expressly told to hide your ancestry to improve your chances for an opportunity most certainly is not a mere anecdote. If it were, then any time a worker testifies that they were propositioned by their boss in exchange for favorable treatment is merely an "anecdote."
If students of any racial minority have to meet significantly more stringent criteria concerning region of origin, lower socio-economic status, sports success, and so forth, than do others not of that minority, that is evidence of discrimination. I never said that "just the fact that the Supreme Court accepted the case" means the plaintiffs have "proven" discrimination. That's not the point at all. If on this record, no reasonable jury could find discrimination because the facts taken as a whole do not amount to discrimination under the applicable legal standard, then the Supreme Court would not have granted cert. The only plausible exception would be if the Court wants to change the interpretation of that legal standard. That's simply a fact. Inform yourself about Supreme Court jurisdiction.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@factmanamerican882 1821 > 1776, 1781, etc.
Second, today, "Judeo-Christian" does not refer to converts from Judaism to Christianity. That it once did tells you that the same term once had a different meaning.
You are perfectly welcome to espouse any cultural values you wish, including those of Thomas Paine, who fervently believed that the Bible led people astray, and away from God.
If America was indeed built on Judeo-Christian values, explain the destruction of the Native Americans, the enslavement of Africans, the two atom bombs, . . . the 2008 financial meltdown, the incessant lying to induce support for endless war, and the existence of a single homeless child. Seems like Amber is the least hypocritical from that perspective.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
A kid used to be able to work over the summer for minimum wage, afford a full year of in-state tuition and fees, and oftentimes books and supplies as well, then get a couple of roommates together, go to New York, San Francisco, LA, Seattle, Denver, Austin, Chicago, get a minimum wage job right away, and afford to live. That was post-war America for decades. That was opportunity.
Those kids grew up, too. Not like now.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Brie, WHY would it matter whether this was an "order?" The government is supposed to meet speech it does not like with MORE speech, not censorship.
Why would the government go via a back door to tell social media this or that statement is a lie? They can announce it loud and clear, publicly. They can tell FB, Twitter/X, etc., that x, y, or z is false at the same time they tell ALL of us that x, y, or z is false.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Luis Alejandro Hey, are you an example of what DNC is, thus proving my point? Or are you a false flag, covertly drumming up support for Trump? What a dilemma.
And say, is depleted uranium a "sob story" to you? How about to Biden and Harris? Is depleted uranium a "sob story" to them, too? Iraq, Yemen, Syria, Somalia, Afghanistan -- so many sob stories, so little time.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@CeresAurora Have you seen it? A ton of econometric techniques and game theory that are nowhere justified, and that they admit involve very arbitrary assumptions, such as that the "statistical" value of a human life lost to homicide is $13,000,000. The interesting part of the study was their finding that increased police presence tends to have a larger impact on violent crime than on property crime, something that other studies have found as well. This study does not extend into the period of higher crime that we are living through now, and it's not evident that any of its conclusions are directly applicable. The cities they surveyed are hugely diverse, which is good in one way but bad in another, making their results less applicable to a specific city, which might be atypical for various reasons. Yet as they themselves pointed out, policing is primarily a local matter.
The monetary value of increased spending on more police (not higher salaries) is unavoidably arbitrary. This study is more opaque than I had thought. I am sure no one on this panel read it. I think the one person who cited it just grabbed the line concerning $1.60 savings for every dollar spent, which the researchers say has a limit, of course. Mathematically naive they are not. You should always be skeptical of econometrics and game theory methods as applied to addressing social problems -- especially the economy. This is news, to anybody?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@dnah02 Well, I've had family tragedies and responsibilities, so that was the reason. As a child, we saved up for yearly vacations, always road trips, and took them. The rest of the year, both parents worked 50 hour weeks. I'm the canary in the coal mine; when I hear people say that the next generation won't have it as good as their parents, well, that was true of two generations for us. I haven't been on a plane in this century. I cook everything I eat, every day.
It's not that big of a deal; lots of other countries are affordable. I don't like having to leave, I would prefer that it be my choice on my timetable but oh well. I'm hardly alone.
I still have the illusion (?) that something marvelous could happen at any moment to turn things around. I'll stick to that for a while longer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@realmonster5866 Well, if Congress does not pass a budget, they won't be fined or go to prison, no, but the US could default, bond markets go into a tailspin, and the world slip into a depression. Military pay, pensions, DOJ, DOD, FAA, SEC, DHS, ICE, FBI, CIA, everything -- all the checks would stop. No one but the House can initiate a budget resolution.
If they entered into some illegal conspiracy not to pass a budget, or accepted bribes, or instructed their agents to short the bond market or the stock market --- then yeah, they could even go to jail. They WOULD go.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@adanactnomew7085 But no one says these platforms are not allowed to delete content. Of course they are. The only question is, what level of immunity should they enjoy when they do act as editors? Can they choose to delete whatever they like, and leave up whatever they please (including proven defamation -- they have the right to leave it up, see the Yelp case, Supreme Court of California), and be responsible to absolutely no one for their decisions? You're responsible for the consequences of your speech. So am I. So are newspapers. You, I, and newspapers can face a lawsuit.
"Moderation" is not a neutral act. If one viewpoint is censored but not another, it makes it appear that no one agrees with the censored viewpoint, and everyone agrees with the viewpoint allowed to stand. Usually, complaints about moderation are deleted as well. Just how much immunity for these decisions is appropriate? Hm? This is getting sinister.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@titanstown2452 Who "made" what, and how? They "worked" for it? Do you know what $70 million in a year is? It's nearly $8000 an hour, for every hour of every day in the year. Who "earned" that? How? And isn't it odd, that only about 50 years ago, no one "earned" that much more than the people working under them; the lowliest worker made 1/25 of what the CEO made, not 1/355. How did this get decided?
Elon Musk? Tesla has one of the worse employment discrimination cases filed against it (that for some reason no one hears about) in this century or the last, and Neuralink has complaints against it for primate torture that are harrowing. The court papers are available online; the usual excuse is that "Elon didn't know," which kind-of contradicts that he "works so hard." The case where he tweeted and the stock market reacted is getting a lot of press time, though, as if that were more important. You can find all of this online -- I mean the actual court documents, not someone's dubious regurgitation of them.
What do you think rich people do with their money, besides control others? What do you think it's about? Ordinary people put money to far better use overall.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timmeyer9191 Plenty of European universities are TUITION-FREE, and they do not employ scads of part-time instructors who have never passed a rigorous civil service test to be allowed to teach at that level. The system of adjuncts you find here is literally illegal in lots of places. In Europe, fees are the equivalent of $750 to $1500 a year, in general, sometimes even less. American students take out loans to go to trade school, and talented students need to be at university, not community college -- which is not free, either. Talented students need to meet real professors and doctoral candidates in their field on Day One. It's bad enough that few high schools provide a solid education. Now you want them to wait two more years? (And then what, an unpaid internship?)
Joining the military means giving up your rights under the Bill of Rights and risking you life. Someone should chose freely to defend their country, not be forced to do it because they have no real choice.
I don't know why I'm pleading for your kids, though. I'm not really an American. If you don't care, I shouldn't either.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@timmeyer9191 When I was a little kid, like 7 or 8, people used to say a girl was going to college to get her MRS degree. They were being offensive and making fun of women, obviously, but in retrospect I only HOPE parents are privately telling their kids exactly that, and swearing them to secrecy. Who do you think has a better chance today, things being as they are, a young couple BOTH of whom have college degrees, or a couple where only one does, or neither? No one is even talking about finding the right person to marry, when that matters the most for a good life, and is really hard to do. Or is Silicon Valley supposed to colonize that, too?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Exactly. The government is supposed to meet speech it does not like with MORE speech, not censorship.
Why would the government go via a back door to tell social media this or that statement is a lie? They can announce it loud and clear, publicly. They can tell FB, Twitter/X, etc., that x, y, or z is false at the same time that they tell ALL of us that x, y, or z is false. No "hamstring," no problem.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
The most common major by far is Business, and has been for 30 years. Most such degrees are a demonstration of docility. An English degree is more rigorous. In 2001-2002, and 2008-2009, computer science grads were not getting offers. If a corporation will not interview you unless you have a degree, a corporation will not interview you unless you have a degree. (I don't believe anyone thinks that is fair. That changes nothing.)
I don't think people understand the current labor market.
BTW, daughter of Vietnamese immigrant Mom Kim Iversen has a degree in Philosophy. She always talks about the value of college, and all the women she knew who did pedicures 55 hours per week to make sure their kids went to college.
Once upon a time not that long ago, a student could pay in-state tuition and fees for a full year at the great state universities (Michigan, Wisconsin, Berkeley, Virginia, Texas, . . . ) with a full-time summer job making the minimum wage. People who did that were a different people. And they often majored in liberal arts, and made a life for themselves. They had independence.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@nothxgg8324 From the actual court filing, NOT a press release,
"Reasonable people understand that the 'language of the political arena, like the language used in labor disputes … is often vituperative, abusive and inexact.' Watts v. United States, 394 U.S. 705, 708 (1969). It is likewise a 'well recognized principle that political statements are inherently prone to exaggeration and hyperbole.' Planned Parenthood of Columbia/Willamette, Inc. v. Am. Coal. of Life Activists, 244 F.3d 1007, 1009 (9th Cir. 2001). Given the highly charged and political context of the statements, it is clear that Powell was describing the facts on which she based the lawsuits she filed in support of President Trump. Indeed, Plaintiffs themselves characterize the statements at issue as 'wild accusations' and 'outlandish claims.' Id. at ¶¶ 2, 60, 97, 111. They are repeatedly labelled 'inherently improbable' and even 'impossible.' Id. at ¶¶
110, 111, 114, 116 and 185. Such characterizations of the allegedly defamatory statements further support Defendants’ position that reasonable people would not accept such statements as fact but view them only as claims . . ."
You don't see the wee, little contradiction? Actually, it is pretty big.
Also, as everyone knows, a press release is offered as spin. On the other hand, legal briefs filed in court always argue in the alternative. Most of the memorandum deals with "New York Times malice," which acknowledges the statements may be false, but requires the speaker either to know they are false, or act in reckless disregard concerning whether they are true or false. Sounds to me like that would not be impossible for Dominion to show.
Oh well, we'll see . . .
1
-
@nothxgg8324 Also, you may not know, but "legal opinion" has a technical meaning.
"A, B, C are true," where A, B, C are statements of fact, is not a "legal opinion." It is an assertion of fact. Even if a lawyer says it.
"In this case, we plan to show that D violated such-and-such law, based on documents, affidavits, video recordings, etc." is one form a legal opinion can take. Paradigmatic, pretty much.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
You're misrepresenting what she said, just like that segment on fake tweets.
Look at the big picture. What I would like is for the in-state tuition of the late, great public universities to be something a kid could pay by working all summer. Up until the 1980s, a minimum wage summer job covered a full year of in-state tuition and fees, and oftentimes books and supplies as well, at nearly all of the public universities. Work-study covered most of the rest. The kids who worked their own way through school were a different people.
Nor do I want qualified kids to be held back by being shoved into community colleges. This almost always holds back the most talented. They belong on the campus of a real university, with doctoral students around to interact with from Day 1. They need that rush of enthusiasm and motivation. They shouldn't have to wait two more years. Enough of this waiting! That goes for unpaid summer "internships," too. Every internship should have, at minimum, a stipend equal to $15.00 per hour, 35-hour week. Anything else is bull****.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@theredscourge And if the company you work for goes bankrupt and you're 45 years old, it's freedom for you, too, when a night class at a university costs $100 per credit hour or the equivalent at trade school, and unemployment benefits aren't affected by your efforts at retooling. At 25, a person needs to count on working 45 years; at 45, the better part of three decades. People who thought they had saved enough for early retirement found out differently in 2001, 2008-2009, 2020, or, if they lacked good health insurance and got a dreaded diagnosis without warning (and despite excellent health habits) at age 58. I don't understand short memories.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@demsandlibsareswinecancer4667 Productivity is an economic concept, and its definition is market value of product produced per manhour worked. It is never optimal to work, say, 12 hours per day; your overall productivity could easily be lower than for someone who works seven hours but diligently, with a fresh mind, and consistently so, rather than working without a break, and then needing to take sick days, etc.
(BTW, my mother is from the same region as Nikola Tesla. We get weird migraines, we love math, etc. Something tells me you know nothing about him except what you might have found on Facebook.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stargazerh112 Re: the last part. We do have a bright line for age of majority, for reasons that are ultimately pragmatic, but well-founded nonetheless. I oppose trying minors as adults. Regardless of anything else, he did not belong in the adult system.
I knew the gun charge was dropped, and I understand why. The problem with the Wisconsin statute was nothing short of a disgrace. These state legislatures do no work, they really don't. Why are they paid?
Barring minors from having most firearms, requiring tests comparable to driving tests for anyone who takes a gun off their own property (out of their home or garage, off their land, etc.), requiring minors to be accompanied by an adult when they carry a firearm, for hunting or otherwise, background checks, and so forth, are all consistent with the Second Amendment. I don't know whether you agree or not, but that is the law.
Then there are simple facts of our sad lives today: Uvalde cuts in favor of having more people carry. I see that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@flamekeeper-oracle13 For her choice to recuse herself from the FIRST case she took and did substantive work on, which she decided represents a conflict of interest with the SECOND one.
Did she ask for advice from a private attorney who has expertise in the rules of professional responsibility? Did she request an opinion letter from the Idaho Supreme Court/Character and Fitness Board,, or whoever it is who is responsible in her state, if anyone?
When I witnessed what appeared to be significant wrongdoing on the part of an attorney, I certainly got some very high level advice on my duty to report, if any, and the advice was not free (nor should it be). Well, California trains you for all that. A lot of people go the cheap route, "a wing and a prayer," etc. I certainly did not. Some were never trained. Not every state does it that way, I suppose. (What I witnessed involved money, however; not poor people . . . smh)
Sorry, this stuff is no joke. Or at least it didn't used to be. Hmm.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If a person isn't paying attention, they might miss one line above: "The cops then used public information to find him." DNA tests for entertainment were not supposed to be "public information." No one thought so. Having said that, anyone who handed theirs over with an expectation of privacy is naive. DNA can always be handed over to law enforcement because that is an extraordinary circumstance and is not done for commercial purposes.
It can also be subpoenaed, and for that very reason, the companies will forego being subpoenaed, and just hand it over in cases where they know they can and will be, to avoid any possible expense. Business is business.
(Of course, once an arrest is made, Kohberger's own DNA can be gathered. A person can also be tricked into handing it over voluntarily prior to arrest.)
But do the people who used these commercial DNA tests know this? Now they do.
Another line: "You do not own rights to the data that comes from your DNA or the DNA of your family members." I certainly do own "the rights" to the data that comes from my DNA, though not anyone else's, insofar as I have the right to say who can see that data. I have never provided DNA except where the results of the analysis were protected by HIPAA. And we do have a reasonable expectation of privacy for that, under the Fourth Amendment, because federal law protects it. So there.
Study harder in law school. :)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@josewilliams6094 For the record, in 2020, the private schools around me, all working-class Catholic in my neighborhood, opened in the fall, established the school routine, closed for a long Christmas break and had some online instruction while infection rates were high, then were cleaned in depth and welcomed the kids back. Masks indoors but not outdoors were mandatory. It worked out fine. Sweden is another example of where it worked, with fewer precautions, but I prefer the Catholic school approach. (I'm agnostic, by the way, and was never Catholic.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Just a small point . . . did you know that many major corporations pay more in lobbyists' fees than in taxes? Even magazines like Fortune and Forbes, and the WSJ, report that -- because it no longer needs to be hidden. Now here is a fun fact: instead of paying taxes, they pay the lobbyists to write the taxes. Then, the government sells bonds, and the corporations buy them. Hence, the US government owes those corporations money, in the form of interest on those bonds, instead of collecting money from them. They are now a creditor. You work, you pay, your money goes to pay them.
Who has power in this picture? Does it sound like a democracy to you?
Just one small example that you seem not to have been informed about.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@derekshirley5543 France has the prestige it does because it raised the agricultural arts to their pinnacle prior to industrialization. Hence, cuisine, couture, fabrics, lace, cheeses, cabinet making, chocolates, olives, wines, perfumes, cosmetics, etc., etc., the things all people need and that raise the quality of life came before the Machine Age. Visual arts, including the first motion pictures. Political theory that influenced every country on Earth. Most of the world lives under a descendant of the Napoleonic Code. Literature second to none. Even a whole lot of Fields Medal winners. The prestige of French culture outside the West is much higher than American culture. People learn English to make money. McDonald's is more lucrative than any French restaurant, but eating at McDonald's too often can shorten your life. (It's starting to look like "the French paradox" is about eating fresh vegetables, "les primeurs" and walking every day, not wine . . . To think that people who smoke more have a longer life and health expectancy!)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@padrelupus You respond with another insipid cliche? Really? You know, someday soon your well being could depend on your ability to think cogently and independently. It could happen. I suggest practicing. That might be wise.
Of course, the catastrophe unfolding in Afghanistan, and the fact that the West, especially the Biden administration, pretends it's not happening, is being noted by all Asian, African, and Latin American peoples. So as you mentioned, there is no "equivalence." It is a horror beyond belief, caused by sheer greed.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@googleisevil8958 I lived in a country where, at the time, elective abortion was impossible after 12 weeks (embryonic stage, plus two weeks in case the conception date was incorrect), and abortion had to be preceded by a written declaration of "mother in distress" and counseling -- it was never offered that day, on demand. Pregnancy expenses were paid 100%, including a clothing allowance; abortion at only 70%. After 12 weeks, a three-person panel had to approve, but it was humane. No seriously mentally ill woman at 15 weeks would be denied, for example, nor a woman beaten by the father of the baby well before viability. No one thought a woman should be put through a pregnancy like that. No one. It was the best abortion law I know of. I wonder if they changed it. I suspect they did.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KRSonbe With respect to his resume, and his repeated plagiarism. I didn't say Biden was the same or worse in general, although he has been casual with the truth concerning various aspects of the pandemic (promising there would be no vaccine mandates, claiming the vaccines prevent contraction, etc., that sort of thing). Trump never lied on his resume because he had no desire to inflate his academics, and he didn't plagiarize because he didn't think anyone writes better than he does. :D
I also wonder about just how much he imposed on women. His reputation while in the Senate was horrible, but back in his day, people thought that was amusing, and even charming. "Randy," they used to call it. By all accounts, Trump was worse.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@KRSonbe Therefore it didn't happen. Say, when did he apologize? At a politically opportune moment, or did he risk anything whatsoever by mouthing the words? Did she accept his apology? Hmm. That's awfully facile.
You're not going to look up his resume lies, repeated and genuinely bizarre plagiarism (such as plagiarizing items from someone else's biography), the article from 2008, or the ones from the time of the Clarence Thomas hearings? No, huh? Well, he did apologize, so . . . If you go back and READ what I wrote, the POINT was not only what he did to Hill, but what the ambience was at the time he did it, how he treated women, and WHY. That's where you can find information about his reputation concerning how he viewed and treated women during that time. That's what you asked about. Not whether he's truly sorry now.
1
-
@KRSonbe Where did you see this interview? More important, was it prepared for the last election, or did it take place back in the 1990s, contemporaneous with events? You do know that people make calculated, self-serving statements, don't you? Did you expect anyone to say anything different during the 2020 election? To paraphrase Diderot, do you job any old way but always praise the master. 18th century. Not news.
I don't recall Hill forgiving him. I seem to recall having read something different, NYTimes, in fact, but I will look it up. She, unlike Biden, is courageous, and not opportunistic. Can the rest of us forgive him? His actions gave us Thomas for life.
(You still don't remember the fake resume and plagiarism, by the way?)
I can't believe Americans. They pick their heroes from among politicians and billionaires. No wonder you're in the sauce you're in.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@cassiescornerreviews6884 What is your source for that? First of all, in Switzerland, the definition of full vaccination includes those who had a proven case of COVID and ONE dose of a two-dose vaccine such as Pfizer (source: their ministry of health). Second, all of these countries have restricted the use of certain vaccines to those over 40 or over 50, and no longer recommend vaccination for the young, or boosters for anyone who is not elderly. Then there are also several special measures taken against mandating vaccination. For example, in France, the National Assembly passed a law prohibiting anyone to ask a minor their vaccine status. It is a crime now to ask, much less mandate, a COVID vaccine for anyone under 18. Naturally, this has effectively ended posing the question, or imposing the mandate, on anyone. Then, the EU parliament subjected pharmaceutical executives to some serious questioning, which exposed the flaws in their initial clinical research.
I bet you didn't know all that.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hrs2044 You mean you think only neo-Nazis and white supremacists are losing jobs? You haven't been paying attention. There has been more and more infighting at many major news outlets, and dismissal, over minutiae. As noted, just recently a person who questioned firing someone over the mention, not use, of the n word in an educational context was himself suspended. It's unclear whether he himself used or mentioned that word; most reports I've heard say he did not. I'm not even talking about the initial case, which may have been more egregious than generally reported; I'm talking about being penalized for discussing the case. Blithely saying Slate can fire whomever they want is not responsive. Do you think being fired for racist speech is a small matter? It is generally career-ending. If you agree that racist speech in the workplace is a very serious matter, then it should not be charged when racist speech did not occur. Otherwise, you dilute the principle and undercut the serious nature of a real offense. By analogy, patting someone on the rear at work is disgusting and grounds for immediate termination. It could be grounds for a lawsuit. But it is not rape. Now consider a pat on the shoulder -- is it the same? Please.
But there's a bigger principle involved. Journalists and educators work in fields that (we all used to agree) require free and robust discussion in order to do their work properly. You said a teacher could be fired for being a neo-Nazi. All right, that's fine. Is it acceptable to fire a teacher who presents the history of the ACLU in defending a neo-Nazi's free speech and assembly rights to his class, and encourages debate? Could a teacher present the incident that just happened at NYTimes and Slate to his seniors in Modern American History and Civics class and discuss it with them? How about in community college? Would that be all right? What do you think most teachers would do? They wouldn't bother. Use an old textbook, give them a multiple choice test, and take home your paycheck. Done.
I think this fight in journalism and at the university is all about the money. These people are jockeying for the few plum positions left in a declining profession. They're not protecting vulnerable people, and I doubt that they care. They're fighting over what's left in an economy that creates a handful very big winners, many losers, and fewer and fewer people in between. They'll use whatever they can to do it, too. There's no focus on ethics here, or civility.
1
-
@hrs2044 I see you're still minimizing the letter. It was not just a matter of two members of Congress acting as private citizens and asking some questions, as anyone could do. First, it was sent on Congressional letterhead. Next, it contained a number of pointed accusations, including: ". . . AT&T [and others] plays a major role in the spread of dangerous misinformation that enabled the insurrection of January 6th and hinders our public health response to the current pandemic." Finally, the seven questions were highly intrusive, framed like interrogatories in a lawsuit, and demanded extensive documentation or other materials to substantiate each response; the last question asked whether AT&T and others (a separate letter was sent to each target company) plan to continue hosting Fox, and if so, why.
It's now a problem to decide whether to answer such a letter, and how to do it.
In the meantime, Trump was again impeached, the House leadership again failed to call witnesses to testify at his Senate trial, and he was again acquitted on a party-line vote. I don't see the necessary changes being accomplished.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rifleman4005 I won't argue with anything you said in your opening paragraphs, as it is either a non sequitur or pointless (and by the way, what is it to me that corporations with zero profits can spawn billionaires, and control what I have access to, without my being consulted? Is there some reason I should be impressed, or celebrate that?)
But what in the world makes you think I worship government? Why would I ever think government "cares" about me in any sense? The very same corporations, where I have no vote, run the government, too.
Most of what the US has achieved is thanks to its geography, which has allowed it to grow a powerful army without being challenged, which in turn allowed it to extract wealth from the rest of the world. We can measure the wealth extraction using its own numbers: the national debt in foreign hands, and the trade imbalance. Of course it is much more than that -- a lot of raw materials were extracted very cheaply from the Third World, for generations, apart from extracting slaves -- but those two very current numbers start to paint a more nuanced and intriguing picture. They make you start to ask questions, instead of parroting the same nonsense every day.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@brasshouse-fireball University of Michigan: annual in-state tuition 15,558 USD; out-of-state tuition 51,200 USD No, NO ONE can earn that with an ordinary summer job. A working student would have to clear $1300 a month for all twelve months, and still need to borrow for books, supplies, electronics, living expenses. BTW, 40 hours per week at minimum wage comes to about $15,600 net, roughly.
1
-
@brasshouse-fireball More talking points. The single most common major in America, by far, and for decades now is . . . Business. The next most common group of majors are all health care related, with Nursing at the top. A Business degree without enough accounting to pass the CPA, or math beyond calculus, plus advanced finance, is worse than Art History. It's a demonstration of docility and lack of imagination, and it usually means the graduate can't write well and doesn't have the patience to read in depth.
Art History majors are rare. If they minor in photography and learn how to set up a web page, they will go farther in, say, fashion merchandising than any business major could hope to. They might even be better prepared for a Master's in Public Administration, or law school, or even an MBA, depending on what else they studied.
This is where lack of funding for higher education has brought us. It has not made students work harder or more creatively. Debt does not take the place of tax support. It doesn't build pride or a sense of responsibility. The tax support for the great state universities was withdrawn first, before debt schemes were introduced. That's what happened. Sure, it has only spiraled since then, true enough.
One other thing -- a "moral" risk. Price inflation is related to grade inflation. Obvious why!
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I read a bunch of stories from several sources about this incident, and skimmed the official report of no racism.
This is what I really think: First, to be wrongly accused of racism, much less fired as a result, is horrendous. Unbelievable. This was the most severe harm suffered, and I hope the employees will have redress. Second, why are people pushed to be so officious? Was there some compelling reason to get campus police to question the student in the first place? The employees were told to do this. Why? Whatever happened to approaching someone, without a show of force, and saying, "I'm so sorry, you can't sit here. It's officially closed for _____. I could help you move over there." Or just leave people alone. Was it THAT big of a deal where somebody sits to have lunch, on a summer day? If the area is closed, spring for a posted sign. Cordon it off. This joint can afford it.
1
-
1
-
Why was in-state college tuition once something that kids paid in full, all on their own, with an ordinary summer job? Why was rent affordable for anyone working full time?
If state universities were subsidized through state taxes, like they once were, it would create DOWNWARD pressure on all tuition. On the other hand, loans are just like leverage, and create UPWARD pressure on all tuition.
Financing college using earned dollars is not the same as borrowing against future earnings. A state subsidy of state universities holds the line on tuition, and private colleges feel the pressure to follow suit, at least to some extent. Letting all colleges set their tuition as they see fit, more or less, while underwriting loans (which means borrowing against future earnings) will always create upward pressure on tuition. You find money to pay for it that doesn't actually exist yet, in the sense of having been earned.
Liberalized bank lending for mortgages forces home prices upward as well. You already know this. How did they fool you into not knowing it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@canadianrepublican1185 And that prevents violent crime and mass shootings, moderates inflation, offers wholesome food at a decent price, makes housing in areas safe for families and kids affordable, ends homelessness, and punishes corruption, market manipulation, and police brutality?
Maybe you should look at what corporations can get away with in the US for a better picture. The discrimination Tesla has been accused of, and the primate torture described at Neuralink, are unlike anything I had ever seen in a major corporation post 1970. The court documents are all posted online. On the other hand, do you think small entrepreneurs have an easy time of it? The last three years should have dispelled that idea. It has been no better in the US than in Canada during the pandemic, and probably worse, since health care is privatized for all but those over 65 and medical bankruptcies did not abate during the "emergency." (The biggest "emergency" was that Bill Gates and Jeff Bezos needed more money.)
The "innovations" that allowed the Internet to combine new forms of advertising and surveillance, and induce people to do nothing about it even in their own private lives -- and even to participate and generate it themselves -- are pretty amazing. I will grant you that. Imagine becoming a billionaire from that, at age 32! That's like accumulating $85,600 a day since the day you were born. Wow, some people are hard workers.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Well, you are far from being in charge of your own destiny if this is the fable you spin from Briahna's comments. Someone put you up to that.
It is never ignorant to ask a pointed question. I also wonder why China instituted actual, complete lockdowns, like you see in prisons. Do they know something about the virus that they are not sharing? I mean, apart from its origins, which they probably knew all along. Robbie was the one blathering, rather than acknowledging that China is an authoritarian country, that they have very likely covered up the virus origins, and that COVID's origins may not be all they are covering up.
I love how no one can ask questions. All questions are "questions." All questions have to be probed for their "subtext," so that we can label the speaker and call them out. In the meantime, funny how we missed the fact that we don't know the answer.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@malachia908 That's not what I'm talking about. Of course most people do not develop a full-blown post-viral syndrome, for any of the diseases I mentioned. But dragging around for months, not yet yourself, and fighting to get your full energy back -- especially if you got sick in the dead of winter -- isn't unheard-of. In fact, it was the usual. More sleep, a better diet, and progressive exercise were recommended, and no drama. Don't tell me it wasn't real.
We are disagreeing about semantics ("long COVID"), and how it should be treated.
Now I'm remembering even more people I knew with pneumonia who experienced this issue. One was initially misdiagnosed, and ultimately had to take off a semester from doctoral studies at U of Chicago. Heavy-duty. She did complete it, of course, but she really had a scare and was tired for a long time. Same thing happened to a woman I knew who was in the army. Please. A severe chest cold with a fever can take two weeks to get back on track.
Maybe people just don't tell you about it? They know what you'll say. 😂
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@gunguru7020 All right, but Hunter is an adult. And deeply disordered. I would not expect Biden to kick him out, even over something as immoral and sordid as refusing to pay the child support he owes. I WOULD expect him to prevent Hunter from using the Biden name to enrich himself, in any manner, but especially not by sitting on an energy board in a foreign country with ties to Russia.
You do raise an interesting question, though -- does Biden support Hunter financially, too? Does he give him money, in addition to offering a room, family dinner, and medical care? I'd offer a room in my home, meals, and medical care to nearly any child, if I could. Giving a person like Hunter cash is practically inviting him to overdose.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Not only that, but "hate speech" is not illegal as such. It can be sanctioned only in certain very narrow contexts, and only in civil suits, not criminal: Title VII hostile environment claims, intentional infliction of emotional distress, defamation, and the like. Colleges are supposed to use Title VII to inform their own regulations. Nadine Strossen wrote about this extensively.
If you are subjected to hate speech, the position of the government is that you should walk away. If you can't, then you might be able to sue for damages, depending on all the facts and circumstances. If it rises to the level of a true threat against you, then you can call the police.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@sarahg2653 Basically, it's not the doctor I'm worried about. It is these patients, who are relatively rare -- relatively -- and that makes their suffering all the greater. Who gets pregnant at 10, or 12, or 13? Have you ever met anyone? Who has a hopelessly deformed fetus, so severe that they cannot give birth to it normally, and the doctors may even be traumatized by the experience of delivering it? Very, very rare. Imagine what it's like to have to leave your home and your state to find care, and to wonder how you will pay.
We are risking traumatizing people to the point where they won't be able to work, or succeed in school, or to take care of existing children, or function normally in the aftermath. I can't imagine it. Taking care of these people does not require no restrictions. There were restrictions under Roe.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@tisbonus What do you think is the issue in a defamation case? It is whether that op-ed, which Depp attached to his complaint, is false. Not incomplete, not biased, not misleading: literally false. I won't answer again. Look up Nolo, look up the Cornell Law School website, read the actual complaint and answer. Look up the "New York Times malice" standard (which makes it really hard for Depp to win -- if they apply it -- and even I have misgivings about applying it in this case).
Or don't. I still cannot get it through my head the degree of ignorance and lack of basic, independent thinking I see. What do you get out of joining the crowd? What do you think this show with two disordered millionaires is doing for you? I can tell you: nothing good. The media has you on a string.
I don't even want to know what you think this case is about, or why you think the tapes don't show mutual abuse -- in which case the article is not false under the law of defamation. It is free speech. If Heard is found liable, it will be reversed on appeal.
As for calling me a troll twice: nope, you are intrigued. I think you might want to know whether the MSM is misleading us -- AGAIN. Take a wild guess.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@erikaoliver2591 This is the misunderstanding. If they were both abusive, her article is true, hence protected speech.
Consider this: a man abuses his wife, and goes to prison for it. He writes a memoir, telling the history of their relationship, and all about the abuse he suffered at her hands, both physical and psychological, including some strange things she did to goad him. He tells the truth -- the facts are all accurate, and his opinions are his own. Free speech? YES, it IS.
I was also opposed to suspending the Fifth Amendment to make Brian Laundrie's parents talk, "just this once . . . for Gabby."
Depp decided to sue to be able to say these things about Heard without being vulnerable to suit himself. His testimony is immune from suit. Neat trick.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@denysecoop7356 But they are not the president, nor are they running for office.
Every person I know who voted for Trump did so as a protest vote against Hillary, and was soon sorry they did. Well, I do not know many Trump voters. Every last one I do know is cool, and I can understand why they did what they did. Not all are white, by the way.
I voted protest this past election: in person, on election day, for LaRiva to protest Leonard Peltier's continued incarceration. I wasn't absolutely sure I did the right thing, until I heard from Peltier's current lawyer, who is a Navy veteran. He is a peach, a real hero. Slightly more than half of his clients are Republicans pressing First Amendment issues, speech or religion. The biography of both men is inspiring.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@deadgolfer6345 Whether he had drugs in his system was determined after the fact, and is thus irrelevant to probable cause. I guess we are so used to living as though we were not a free people that we don't seem to remember that absent probable cause, you do NOT have to deal with the police at all. Did he get into a car accident? Apparently he did. Does he have an obligation to report it, if he hopes to keep a driver's license? Absolutely -- and I am for lifting the licenses of a lot more people than get them lifted -- for impaired driving, for not reporting accidents promptly, and pretty much all other significant infractions. And guess what? THAT is the penalty.
There is something called a Terry stop -- which is a very brief encounter based on reasonable suspicion, and does not involve taking you physically into custody. It just means talking to you. Of course police can talk to you. BUT you cannot be arrested without probable cause, prior to the arrest, and not based on stuff that happened afterwards. If that does not "sound right," you need to ask yourself why. You are used to not being free, perhaps? Thanks bin Laden, thanks COVID. Isn't this just swell?
1
-
@jackgranger6539 False, and I have absolutely no idea what you might be referring to, if anything. But more to the point, why are you following me, and purporting to assert to have determined that I, and not you, are lying? I don't know you. I do, however, know the law on probable cause and Terry stops. I am guessing that you are not well versed in that area. I don't know of course. As I said, I don't know you. |Perhaps you edited law review at Yale.
I am blocking you now, which I think I would have done before if what you claim were true, and if you persist in this manner, defaming me even under a pseudonym (which actually has a basis), I will report you. See how that goes. It's not my problem anymore. (Whether it turns out to be yours is also not my concern either way.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
DmY808 When you make it so personal, then it is. For YOU.
Political economy is not about personal covetousness, envy, optimism, pessimism, or family tragedy and triumph . . . It's about historical and contemporary economic analysis. It's about understanding what has worked better for earlier generations and in other places. IOW, it's not about you. It's first of all about millions of young people ages 17 to 29 who could become a LOST generation. Most of them may never have the chance you had, no matter what they do. They already have debts, they don't find permanent jobs with a future, marry, start families, or leave home, especially while ACA still lets them stay on their parents' insurance. And for what? For whose benefit? How is all this good?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@stevestevens8749 Well DUH. If two parents divorce and cannot come to an agreement concerning the medical care of their minor child, how do you think a decision will be reached? Either one may file suit, if they so desire. It is their constitutional right.
Granted, it is mostly multimillionaires and billionaires -- and corporate entities -- who avail themselves of the court system, in contract disputes, securities disputes, antitrust, etc., but little people have a right to go to court, too, at least in principle.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@Polit_Burro Yeah, I'm particularly censored when I point out that we run deficits, then pay interest to the rich. They don't pay; we pay them. We enrich them, then pay them some more.
You would think the average person would have figured that out by now. Didn't the Epstein saga get them to start thinking that maybe the rich aren't so great after all? If the BP catastrophe, HSBC, Enron, the implosion of the financial system in 2008-2009, and social media turned into mass surveillance for corporations and the state, etc., etc., didn't do it already. What will it take? What still has to happen?
Reminds me of the Cavafy poem, "Waiting For the Barbarians."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
zaxx19 Why do you think I disagree?
As for whether a person needs a four-year degree for a white-collar, service sector, office job, let me ask you this: who gets those jobs? Do they need the university training to do the job, or do they need the piece of paper to make it through HR screening and be hired for the job?
Notice I'm not mentioning real qualifications, job duties, fairness, etc. I'm saying employers have given up on high school grads. No, it isn't fair.
I also stand by the notion of opportunity. Only an adult can decide they do not want to pursue a college degree. A minor can't make that decision. At 16, the average person has over FIVE decades of worklife ahead of them, and probably jobs in two distinct fields. Who can tell them what to do? Fifty years is a long time.
1
-
zaxx19 What do you think college kids major in, anyway? The most common major BY FAR is Business, and has been for decades. The next group of majors are all health-related, with Nursing at the top. Very few people major in the traditional "liberal arts" -- and those who do, and do well, go to good law schools or MBA programs, or the advertising world, or story editing in film and television, etc. "Useless degrees?" That's a right-wing talking point. General Business, without a lot of advanced math to understand finance in depth or at least a decent amount of accounting, preferably CPA level, is often pretty useless. A lot of those people don't want to read and can't write. If they also can't do math, . . . ?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jackgranger6539 They are not representing anyone. Lawyers can be activists, and are allowed to comment on what they think a case will mean for future cases, or what they think the law should be. If you think this segment should have analyzed this case, and stayed there, you have a right to your opinion. I think juveniles should not be charged as adults, and said so from the very first, last summer. A lot of people were surprised, and admitted, finally, that kids shouldn't be charged this way -- if not never, then really, really rarely. I would have never brought this case. That is an activist position. I'm an activist, then. (So?)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@hrs2044 In short, the "questions" were framed in the style of discovery, as it exists in court. They asked for documentation or other material to support every answer. You think these are ordinary questions, for purposes of discussion?
"1. What moral or ethical principles (including those related to journalistic integrity,
violence, medical information, and public health) do you apply in deciding which
channels to carry or when to take adverse actions against a channel?
2. Do you require, through contracts or otherwise, that the channels you carry abide by any content guidelines? If so, please provide a copy of the guidelines.
3. How many of your subscribers tuned in to Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN on U-verse,
DirecTV, and AT&T TV for each of the four weeks preceding the November 3, 2020
elections and the January 6, 2021 attacks on the Capitol? Please specify the number of subscribers that tuned in to each channel.
4. What steps did you take prior to, on, and following the November 3, 2020 elections and the January 6, 2021 attacks to monitor, respond to, and reduce the spread of
disinformation, including encouragement or incitement of violence by channels your
company disseminates to millions of Americans? Please describe each step that you took and when it was taken.
5. Have you taken any adverse actions against a channel, including Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN, for using your platform to disseminate disinformation related directly or
indirectly to the November 3, 2020 elections, the January 6, 2021 Capitol insurrection, or
COVID-19 misinformation? *If yes, please describe each action, when it was taken, and
the parties involved.*
6. Have you ever taken any actions against a channel for using your platform to disseminate any disinformation? If yes, please describe each action and when it was taken.
7. Are you planning to continue carrying Fox News, Newsmax, and OANN on U-verse,
DirecTV, and AT&T TV both now and beyond any contract renewal date? If so, why?"
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1