Comments by "A.J. Hart" (@cobbler88) on "JRE Clips" channel.

  1. I started watching this doc this evening. If, after 15 minutes, you don't have a laundry list of, "Wait a minute ..." moments in which you realize there's something hinky about what is being served to you, you're not paying very close attention.
    2
  2. I applaud Joe for pointing out the lack of scale regarding Trump's hotel receiving a relatively small amount of money for actual services and benefits rendered, vs. the Clinton Foundation. Kulinski said he could give us multiple offenses that would be better grounds for impeachment, and this is what he leads with? It makes me wonder how weak - or at least easily dismissed - the other things are. Based on this vid, I don't think Kulinski is necessarily a bark-at-the-moon Leftist out to get the POTUS with anything he can. But I think he may need a bit more seasoning until he can recognize that you can't equivocate between those two examples just because you think you can make a case. People have to recognize them as being plainly comparable without being convinced.
    1
  3.  @tumadrexuxa  That was a bulked-up Bruce Lee. He usually hung out in the 125-135 range. And obesity based on a height-to-weight (BMI) scale is only a marginally useful took when discussing "normal" people - not very physically active people or athletes. Start plugging in the stats for NFL DBs, LBs and safeties and see how many come in as obese or overweight. If Russell Wilson is one inch shorter or one pound heavier than what is listed on the Seahawks' official roster, he qualifies as obese according to the BMI.
    1
  4. I was just thinking the other day, THERE'S a guy who raced for the edge of the cliff and tossed himself over. Benjamin is funny in stretches, but was DEFINITELY one who could not afford to burn any bridges in show business.
    1
  5.  @IKILLMANY  It's not always so obvious. At least, not when he's not technically performing. For great stretches, he's more like an insane person saying things that make you uncomfortable who occasionally throws a zinger in there.
    1
  6. 1) He was being attacked by a man dozens of pounds lighter and gave him a free one to get a measure of him. Fighters feel each other out all the time. Kicks to the face were out, so there was really low risk for a stuntman used to taking blows vs. a tiny man. 2) What do you really have to lose by losing a best-of-three to Bruce Lee? It's not like Lee can really go around bragging about beating an anonymous stuntman. And it's not like losing an actual fight. You're basically losing a points fight. 3) Now you're buying into the myth a little here. There was no measurement of striking quickness. The assessment of Lee needs to be taken with a grain of salt. Everyone is more than willing to say that Lee showed the West things they'd never before seen, which is certainly admirable. But then they forget that when discussing Lee's speed, which may have been something unseen in the West before, but may not necessarily have been that superior in regards to other Eastern martial arts practitioners. More importantly, though, is the fact that people who are used to combat sports - including stuntmen who have a background dealing with fight/stunt choreography - do not see speed as being as fast as civilians do when watching janky old film footage playing at the wrong speed. They're used to seeing speed.
    1
  7. It's going to be interesting what the science says after a generation or so of widespread legalized marijuana. I won't argue that it is or isn't as addictive as the others. I was hooked on cigarettes about 25 years ago but stopped one day and haven't had one since. I drank a lot in high school and college but never "needed" a drink and the amount I drink has tapered as I've matured. I maybe have about two dozen drinks a year. If I never got together with family, that number would probably be about 10. But smoking marijuana is still smoking. People will continue to get cancer from smoking pot just as they'll continue to lose brain cells as they would with alcohol abuse. Circling back to addiction, though, I have the feeling that people aren't being frank about how addictive marijuana is. We don't really have an adequate body of research for it, but how often do you see people like Joe NOT smoking or referencing smoking? I'm not saying he does it 24/7. But he IS one of the public faces of legalized pot, and one thing I've noticed with those people is that they never seem to just have a joint to take the edge off at the end of the day, or one just before bed. They ALWAYS seem to have some at hand. To me, that smells a little like addiction whether it be chemical or situational.
    1
  8. Well, the NBA could never play another game and most people wouldn't care. But it's a shame about Tom and Rita. :(
    1
  9. @Bogdanmeoff What do you mean "WERE"? :)
    1
  10.  @diobrando5896  Romney doomed any future aspirations to become POTUS with that vote to convict, thats for sure.
    1
  11.  @JNYC-gb1pp  You seem to feel very much put upon. It might not hurt to find someone NOT like-minded with whom to discuss these things.
    1
  12.  @JNYC-gb1pp  I merely read what you put out there. It's not so much a disagreement on some foundational terms. More of a level of degree of retaliation is all. No big. But I still think the worst thing would be to be among like-minded folks in that regard. :) Take care.
    1
  13. If people commenting here were actually representative of the public - and half of those who claimed they were going to see this movie had actually done so - maybe it wouldn't still need to triple its box office reciepts two months after its release to offset the budget/marketing.
    1
  14.  @OverdosedDrop  Hey, don't sweat it. It's a lot easier for people to blame their failures in life on some grand conspiracy or dark, secretive organization than it is to be accountable for their own actions. Take care.
    1
  15.  @HumansAreBots  Yeah, man! Just check the transmitters in your dental work and the tracking chip in the back of your neck, man! IT'S OVER MAN!
    1
  16.  Emily Ru  Feel free to point out where I wrote that we should wholeheartedly believe everything the government tells us. It's apparent that your rhetorical ceiling is the sort of ad hominem attack we should expect from middle schoolers who sideline as bark-at-the-moon conspiracy theorists, but try your best to rein yourself in and competently fulfill that one request.
    1
  17.  @divanosoba9658  The box exists for a reason. People with critical thinking skills not only know when and how to venture outside of its borders, but become more creative as a result of it. I've been in visual media for decades. As I'm sure you can imagine, we get plenty of people fresh out of college who are "artists" and eschew any sort of structure being foisted onto what they do. Those who never come to recognize that creativity requires boundaries are the ones who fail. They don't develop the acuity necessary to actually function. Who has more on the ball, the person who made a bong over a week in a ceramics studio, or the one who figured out how to do it with an apple in the back seat of a car? I've been there. I was reading - but not necessarily believing - similar nonsense decades ago when I was in the Army. In my case, it was "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" and some of the early Graham Hancock books. There is a LOT of fascinating history in those and they're real page turners that pose a lot of interesting "what ifs." But one thing they all seem to have in common is similar to what Lazar does (although without the interesting historical context, obviously): they lay out quite a series of small facts, then at some point make a HUGE leap that readers often simply do not recognize. All the breadcrumbs are laid so closely together that they don't notice that the last one was laid on the other side of the canyon. Still, it can be a solid intellectual exercise. But you have to make it one. The people making the claims generally put themselves in the position of skeptic so that we will assume that they've already vetted the information and we can take it at face value because then we don't have to think so much. When you only have one or two people over about a 70-year period really trying to argue from authority on these things - and the claims ultimately can't be verified because of conveniently missing evidence (which, of course, by its very absence is proof that it existed), dead witnesses, etc. - you don't just take the bong from a stranger, take a HUGE hit and hold that shit in as long as you can because, in the end, you're probably just going to end up appearing retarded. People buying Lazar's story hook, line and sinker are the people who watch specials where "researchers" go in search of Bigfoot and Noah's ark actually wondering if they're going to find it by the end of the hour. No. Pretty sure we'd have heard something about that. And what's the fun in just drinking it in anyway? Exercise those skeptic muscles or you lose them. And the more you use them, the less calories they require. Lazar is very good at promoting Bob Lazar, but there are pretty simple reasons he hasn't really gotten much traction over the decades. And I don't blame Joe for giving him a platform. He's there to entertain and has a history of being a conspiracy nut himself (which he acknowledges) so it's in good fun. If you want to hear one with someone who apparently believes EVERYTHING, check out the one with Steven Tyler. :)
    1
  18. Lee's character in the movie didn't really trash talk Ali either.
    1
  19.  @dyschromotopia  And that number never gets smaller as the legend grows and is repeated, does it? :) Lee is exponentially more superior in death than he ever was in real life. That's the nature of myths and legends, though. And people forget that pioneers tend to stumble alot along their journey.
    1
  20. @Diamant Flawed logic is flawed logic.
    1
  21. And a baby kicks at you while you try to change its diapers. There's a reason there are weight classes.
    1
  22. So it's okay to assume that a person would lose to Lee, but not okay to assume Lee would lose to someone else?
    1
  23. First, it's a toss up whether what Pitt's character was picturing was accurate to the character. Second, why would anyone need to point out that Pitt's character was fictional? Did someone have to tell you that Darth Vader was fictional or was that pretty apparent?
    1
  24. ​ @MMFB1981  There is no contradiction. The statement was straightforward. You simply conflated two separate issues into one. Understandable. Having already established the fact that Pitt's character was fictional, the subject then shifts to whether he's remembering something accurately, or whether he's idealizing it.
    1
  25.  @MMFB1981  To me, he was flashing back to a previous encounter with Lee that bolsters why Zoe Bell's character doesn't care for him. That and the whole wife-killing thing.
    1
  26. I doubt Rogan ever said Rousey could outbox Mayweather. He hasn't smoked THAT much pot.
    1
  27. You buy into his striking and kicking being "unmatched." There is video of Lee attempting to hit a heavy bag. His striking was clearly matched. His kicking was also likely matched. When it comes down to it, all arguments really just rely on the belief that he was somehow superhumanly fast. But combat sports practitioners do not see speed in the same way civilians watching crappy film footage (that is never played at the proper speed, btw) do. That and Lee being a tiny man make a much greater difference than civilians realize.
    1
  28. So Lewis was around 330# when he "sparred" with Lee? No wonder he couldn't keep himself from being kicked or hit.
    1
  29.  @john84896  And the evidence that he's making it up in his mind - rather than remembering something that actually happened - is ...?
    1
  30. Would any of those people have benefited by bad-mouthing Lee?
    1
  31. Don't worry, Joe. Smith doesn't know anything about baseball or football either, and barely speaks knowledgeably about basketball.
    1
  32. It's not right, but it IS karma where Uygur is concerned. Hell, just for interviewing a guy for the purpose of mocking him it's almost worth playing a little fast and loose with context. Maybe the correction should have begun with, "Cenk Uygur, who legitimized David Duke by virtue of interviewing him ..."
    1
  33.  @TroubadourAdamRoad  Journalism has always been hacky. There was no golden age in which the sort of investigative journalism people idealize was the norm. It's always been subject to agendas and politics.
    1
  34. ​ @jwilliama4427  Google "Janet Cooke" and get back to me about investigative journalism and the value of Pulitzer Prizes. Or maybe don't. I think there are about a half dozen of them sitting in our currently abandoned offices downtown. Take care.
    1
  35.  @philnewhouse4879  At first I thought that can't possibly be true. We should be used to it by now. But every time it reaches new highs/depths, it DOES tend to leave you reeling a bit.
    1
  36. Because students are always the way to find out the "real shit" about teachers.
    1
  37. Sadly enough, there's just as much evidence of Pitt having fought Lee as most of the other guys who claim to have fought Lee. :o)
    1
  38. So, which horse do you take in the lack-of-credibility race: The fish wrap or the Armenian genocide denier?
    1
  39. Combat sports guys are not as impressed with speed the same way civilians are. And with the likely size difference Lebell might only have to stalk Lee into a corner, while anything Lee did to avoid that would put him in less than optimal positions to have his maximum power or speed.
    1
  40.  Joe Sudz  In charge of getting names other than McGregor out there so that more casual fans are interested in the fights.
    1
  41.  @gjergjjiim1615  But people have to actively seek out something like UFC Countdown. Casual sports fans don't do that. The names need to get out there more as top athletes in general rather than being great in their own little corner of the landscape.
    1
  42.  @countys32  Norton has never carried a movie that made big money at the box office and he hasn't done one more than 10 people wanted to see in about a dozen years. I think it's understandable if he's a bit of an unknown quantity to younger people.
    1
  43. Does anyone ever figuratively say those things?
    1
  44. As portrayed in the movie, he wasn't technically picking a fight either. He was getting the chorus to do the heavy lifting while peddling a fairly typical line of empty bullshit.
    1
  45. Be careful with those fresh takes. The next thing you know, you'll say, "If you don't like the weather, just wait 5 minutes!"
    1
  46. This is some revisionist history going on right here regarding MLK Day. I was around and aware when the movement to establish MLK Day was active. There was not some huge anti-MLK Day movement founded on the basis that white folks didn't want the lone holiday celebrating a single American to be celebrating a black man. What people resisted was giving ANY American other than George Washington getting his/her own federal holiday. And this dovetails with a criticism of Mr. Davis. He's either ignorant or disingenuous. First, George Washington's birthday IS a federal holiday. This year it's Feb. 17. I think most of us consider him an American. And I'll spare you a little time. He was born in Virginia. Second, Lincoln's birthday has never been a federal holiday. Third, given the previous two statements, Presidents Day is obviously not a combination of Washington's and Lincoln's birthdays. It is also not a federal holiday. This is not to say I disagree with MLK Day being a federal holiday. I just prefer people to speak the truth when they decide to expound on these things to a public that generally trusts that they're being intellectually honest. If I was a few years younger, what Mr. Davis said probably wouldn't have sent up the red flags that it did.
    1
  47.  @GlacialScion  It's important to remember that at that point we had only given that honor to one out of dozens of presidents and hundreds of millions of Americans. That alone meant Washington's place was exalted above all who came before or followed. He was the commanding general of the forces that eventually defeated the British, was a founding father of the nation, was selected to the its first president then chose to leave office when people were encouraging him to serve for life. That's one hell of a resume and sets a very high standard. It's up to each person to decide for himself whether MLK's resume stacks up favorably enough to have earned him an honor equal to that of Washington. Not only that, but he must also - pretty much by definition - be held in higher regard than Lincoln and Jefferson. There was plenty to discuss back then without dragging it down into the mud by just dismissing earnest disagreement as racism. So when that's the go-to for someone, I begin to doubt how intellectually honest or lazy they may be.
    1
  48. Oh yeah? Well Mahk says the best combination comes stock in a 1997 Suzuki Vitara! :D
    1
  49. I've seen Lee interviews. We take people based on our experiences. I can see why people would think he came off as a jerk in his interviews. But that doesn't mean he was. There are cultural and fish-out-of-water dynamics to consider.
    1
  50.  @StandWatie1862  Does he praise Polanski as man, or Polanski as director?
    1