nittany ram wrote:

wv wrote:

I’m still with Jill. My interpretation is similar to some of the folks that commented after the article. I think basically she’s saying “lets take these questions/concerns seriously, and not just blow them off, and lets do more research on these issues.” And i agree with that approach. I also dont have a problem with her view of computers/corporations/profit/schools.

w
v

That’s fine. There are still more issues in which I agree with Jill than disagree.

But this fear of wifi stuff is ridiculous. The incidence rate of brain cancer is no higher now than prior to the incidence of wifi. And it hasn’t been ‘blown off’. Countless studies have shown there is no link. As pervasive as wifi is today, if it caused cancer, there would be a huge increase in cases. But that hasn’t happened. This is not a question that should be continue to be taken seriously because it simply isn’t supported by data.

Should we continue to spend time and resources determining whether the Earth is round because some people continue to take that question seriously?

—————-

I dont think we should spend time/money on determining whether the Earth is round. I have no problem with spending time/money on checking out aspects of Wi-Fi and its possible effects on life-forms. I know nothing about the wi-fi issue btw. This is the first I’ve heard of it.

If i have to choose between a Green-Partier who is a bit overly cautious or a bit wary of vaccines/wi-fi/whatever, but who will stop the deadly War On the Poor and the Corporate War on the Biosphere — and Hillary/Trump — I’ll take the Green-Partier every time.

Blah blah blah, politics, blah. Not trying to convince/persuade. Just a post here and there, sharing my ‘own’ small, personal, subjective view.

btw, when i was camping i saw a swarm of yellow swallow-tail butterflies
have a little conference on a patch of sand near a river. Must have been
about fifty of them. Just sitting there, all together in a circle. I think
they were talking about the election.

w
v

“…Trump also voiced concern Tuesday that the election would be rigged in November.

“I’m talking about at the voter booth – I mean we’ve seen a lot of things over the years,” Trump told Sinclair reporter Scott Thuman. “And now, without the IDs, the voter IDs, and all the things going on – and some bad court cases have come down.”

Trump provided no evidence of planned voter fraud. “I just hear things, and I just feel it,” he said…”
————————-

He just feels things.

Four years of Hillary is what
I’m feelin. Sigh.

w
v

nittany ram wrote:

It wouldn’t accomplish much to lecture him about zoology and paleontology and evolution and point out we’re not monkeys.

Actually, humans are talking monkeys. Unlike the outdated Linnean taxonomic hierarchies modern taxonomic systems are based on evolutionary history so a named group would include the common ancestor and all of its descendants. Since humans are apes and apes are descended from a monkey progenitor, then humans are also monkeys. Technically, we’re all sarcopterygii (lobe-finned fish) as well, since this group gave rise to the tetrapods which is the group that includes all reptiles, birds and mammals.

So not only are humans talking monkeys, we’re also talking lobe-finned fish…technically speaking. Obviously it’s usually not useful to talk about humans in these terms but we are sarcopterygii.

———

I can trace my family all the way back to a small pool of primordial ooze,
in the Naples Italy region. Just so you know.

Where did ‘life’ come from Mr Science?

w
v

canadaram wrote:

I see that the Jets released Zac Stacy today. If the Rams want to replace Mason I wonder if they would go back that direction. I’m a Cunningham fan and I am encouraged by Malcolm Brown. Aside from the scouting reports that I have read I don’t know what the Rams have in Aaron Green. Anyway, sounds like there might be a spot up for grabs in the backfield.

———————

Good old Zac Stacy. What a strange career. The guy really impressed
me that one year. He just bowled defenders over, and powered his way
downfield. Seemed to have good vision. Had some S.Jackson in him.
I thought he was gonna be a good-not-great-RB.

And then rather quickly it all seemed evaporate.

w
v

waterfield wrote:

This is the type of hyperbole that turns good people off. Good people who can actually make a change for the betterment of people who have little. No one -not even Trump or Hillary-is “against” the poor. No one believes these people represent a threat. There is no “WAR” against people who are poor. When people hear these ridiculous words they automatically tune out. Of course there are policies and even laws that adversely impact those who have little. There always have been. And we need to elect those who will actively help those in need along with our own personal work. But there is no “war” against the poor in the sense that we intentionally wish harm to those who we perceive as poor. Neither Hillary nor Trump have any ill will toward those less fortunate. “War against the poor” language does more harm than good because it takes a very serious issue and turns it into pure childish nonsense.

——————
Well, we disagree on that Waterfield.

No big thing, but we have fundamental disagreements on Politics/Economics.

I think the Corporotacracy that we live in, is destroying the poor. You, apparently, do not think that. We’ve gone round and round on this for years, i am not gonna say the same thing for the gazillionth time. We just disagree.

Hillary is going to win. Be happy.

w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by wv.

“…a group of six conglomerates who control 90 percent of the media in America. This results in biased or incomplete information trickling down into the offices of smaller publications with fewer investigative resources…”

If i was gonna try to describe America in ten sentences, to a visiting Extra Terrestrial,
that might be one of the ten sentences I’d pick.

w
v

What is ‘median income’ ?

I mean is that one of those deals where
one family can earn a billion dollars a year
and a bunch of other families can earn 15K a year,
but the ‘median income’ will then be a hundred million dollars, er somethin ?

w
v

Zooey wrote:

No

Trump is the end of the world.

————–
I dunno, Zooey. Clinton is a known quantity.

But Trump has never held office before, right?
Do we really know what he would do or try to do?

I am not persuaded we do. And I am not persuaded that 8 years of Clinton
would be better than four years of Trump.

I dont think the Dems ever
change if Clinton wins. I think the only way they move left
is if Clinton loses.

So for me, its complicated. For me, Trump is a very strange mix of knowns
and unknowns.

I’m not trying to ‘persuade’ anyone of anything. Not the least bit
interested in that. Just sharing my own view.

Now the Supreme Court is a big deal, and it ‘almost’
decides things for me. But in the end, I dont trust Clinton
to nominate anyone that would vote against Corporate Personhood. Citizens United, maybe, but not Corporate Personhood — and the biosphere was being destroyed long before Citizens United. It just speeded things up. So, i dont see her as changing the trajectory of the war against the poor and the biosphere. I think she’d do all the usual things with regard to identity politix…..

w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by wv.

nittany ram wrote:

“We thought we’d try to work a little bit — not just sit around on the couch and eat Cheez-Its all summer,” Keenum said. “I think we made a jump.”

As someone who sits around a lot eating Cheez-its I can testify to the fact that it’s probably not the best way to hone your skills as a QB. I’ve been eating Cheez-its for over 30 years and I’m no better a QB now than I was 30 years ago.

——————

“You don’t become a four-time Super Bowl champion by eating junk food.”

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2016/01/tom-bradys-chef-breaks-down-patriots-quarterbacks-crazy-eating-habits/

…The real challenge presumably lies in working around the restrictions Brady and his chef have imposed. There are certain ingredients Campbell absolutely won’t use when feeding the Brady clan. “No white sugar. No white flour. No MSG,” Campbell told Boston.com. “I’ll use raw olive oil, but I never cook with olive oil. I only cook with coconut oil. Fats like canola oil turn into trans fats. … I use Himalayan pink salt as the sodium. I never use iodized salt. “(Tom) doesn’t eat nightshades, because they’re not anti-inflammatory. So no tomatoes, peppers, mushrooms or eggplants. Tomatoes trickle in every now and then, but just maybe once a month. I’m very cautious about tomatoes. They cause inflammation.” Don’t expect to see Brady consuming coffee, caffeine, fungus or dairy anytime soon. The Pats QB also doesn’t eat much fruit, according to Campbell, though he’ll occasionally break his fruit ban every now and then for a nice banana smoothie…

Read more at: http://nesn.com/2016/01/tom-bradys-chef-breaks-down-patriots-quarterbacks-crazy-eating-habits/

w
v

I dunno why so many white men loathe Hillary,
but they are not alone. Lots of groups loathe Hillary.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/cover_story/2016/07/the_people_who_hate_hillary_clinton_the_most.html
…
…….“I think that Hillary Clinton is a sociopath, so I think that her main interest is in her pocketbook, and I think that’s obvious from looking at the Clinton Foundation,” says Uday Sachdeva, a 22-year-old Trump supporter from Georgia who is about to start medical school…

…Butcher says of Obama. “He believes the opposite of what I do on almost every issue.” All the same, he says, “If I met Barack Obama on the street, there’s a good chance I’d say he’s a decent guy. I don’t get that feeling from Hillary Clinton. I don’t feel like she’s a likable person at all. At all. I think she feels like she’s above the law, and she’s above us peasants.”

…
….It could be that the reasons people give for disliking Clinton have changed simply because she herself has changed. She entered the White House as a brashly self-confident liberal. Early on, some of the president’s advisers sought to undermine her plans for health care reform because they were thought to be insufficiently business-friendly; in response, Carl Bernstein, one of her biographers, quotes her snapping at her husband, “You didn’t get elected to do Wall Street economics.” Then, after the epic repudiation of the 1994 midterms, in which Republicans won a House majority for the first time since 1952, she overcorrected—becoming too cautious, too compromising, too solicitous of entrenched interests. As she would say during her 2000 Senate campaign, “I now come from the school of small steps.”

In other words, people hated Hillary Clinton for being one sort of person, and in response to that she became another sort of person, who people hated for different reasons. But this doesn’t explain why the emotional tenor of the hatred seems so consistent, even as the rationale for it has turned inside out. Perhaps that’s because anti-Hillary animus is only partly about what she does. It’s also driven by some ineffable quality of charisma, or the lack of it….
…see link

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by wv.

waterfield wrote:

I’m sorry for offending those who believe as I do on Trump but have no children or grand children. I’m sure there are many such people. It’s just that I have encountered few. I have roughly 11 friends who I can easily call progressives and “leftists”. 3 of them are either married or not and none of the 3 have children. To a person they spend their entire time arguing how terrible Hillary is. The other 8 have extended families including lots of kids. They are deeply involved in preventing a Trump Presidency and less concerned about Hillary’s obvious faults. So in that light its anecdotal. That’s my little world and I perfectly understand that may or may not be representative. And to those individuals where that is not representative I do apologize.

Now -as to the subject of my post-when did we lose our civility when it comes to a genuine debate?

————
And i have worked with literally hundreds of parents who have
completely neglected and abused their own children. Let alone the ‘future generations’.

So, different personal experiences.

I dont generalize mine the way you are doing though.

w
v

zn wrote:

There is nothing good about Trump, at all. No redeeming quality that makes the unsavory stuff palatable.

….

—————–
Agree. There is nothing good about Trump.
I would argue there is nothing good about Hillary, either.

So, thats where we disagree. We agree on Trump. Not on Hillary.

w
v

bnw wrote:

And now Trump, at his presser, calls for foreign espionage.

—————

Well, without getting into a big thing about it — I dont even care about “foreign” “espionage”. I’m so utterly sick of all forms of ‘tribalism’ that i just cant work up any outrage at the notion of “foreign espionage”.

I just dont seem to have a ‘nationalist’ bone in my body anymore.

The US plays the espionage game all over the world. As you know.
The US interferes in other nations politics whenever and wherever it wants. As you know.

Why should i get upset about the (shocking 🙂 ) notion that other nations
might do it here, or that a politician would make an off the cuff quasi-humorous remark about it. It reminds me of when Reagan said “we start the bombing in an hour” or words to that effect. Its just yacking.

Anywayz…Am i supposed to be rooting for the American National Security State? Am i supposed root against those evil “foreign spies” ?

I’ll let the Nationalists worry about that.

For me there’s only two tribes now. And there’s always, only, been
two tribes. And you know what they are, comrad.

w
v

bnw wrote:

I disagree. A parent or grandparent does have skin in the game. For decades you make sacrifices and plans for your childrens benefit that go far beyond whatever a non-parent ever conceives.

————–
Well there are plenty of ‘parents’ who abuse and neglect their ‘skin in the game’.
And conversely there are plenty of non-parents who ‘love their neighbors’ and commit
there lives to doing social work and caring for other life forms, both human and animal, etc.

So, personally, i dont buy the “parents” care more about the world
than nonparents. Its a mixed bag. Always has been.

On the trump statement….I think Trump supporters will evaluate it as Trump being a bit humorous, shooting from the hip, just slamming Hillary, no big deal.
The pro-Hillary crowd will be all ‘outraged’…and the undecideds….will it matter to them?

I dunno. My gut feeling is, George Will was right to point to the fact Americans dont elect ‘angry’ presidents. Now maybe things have changed in America, but it looks to me, like Hillary is the next President. We shall see.

Its all up the Undecideds-in-the-Swing-States. Noone else matters now.

w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by wv.

Yeah, i think that’s the zack neruda view, too.

What are the ‘swing states’ btw? Ohio, Florida….what else?

w
v

• This reply was modified 9 years, 9 months ago by wv.