Member since Jul 22, 2009

Contributions:

  • Posted by:
    anon on 03/12/2011 at 1:06 PM
    i watched the edited vers on okeefes site and it was funny...
    i generally agreed with most of what the npr guy said, tho he overstated some things.
    and was surprised to hear that npr thinks of itself as even-handed...
    they obviously have a liberal bent.
    the rub here is that npr represented themselves one way when they really are something else.
  • Posted by:
    anon on 01/21/2011 at 4:05 PM
    Yes, speedy recovery, but prudently speedy.

    The recent 'total recovery' talk has me confused and concerned.

    Confused because - does it mean that she will likely return to her state of health before the accident?
    This seems impossible, but is what is implied by 'total recovery'.
    Are we expecting too much of her while hoping for the very best?

    Concerned because - while the idea of getting back to her job will be a huge motivating factor in her recovery, she runs the risk of doing it before she is ready.
    I bet she has her priorities straight: personal health - both mental and physical before returning to work.
  • Posted by:
    anon on 01/19/2011 at 2:07 PM
    As some who is proud to say ‘i don’t know if there is a god or not,” (altho my best guess is that there is no god) I used to tolerate religious people more. But lately, I realized that that religious people want you to think like them. It’s not just their ‘personal beliefs’. They vote to get you to do what they want you to do.
    That being said, it’s amazing that this country has held together all these years with all the diverse racial and religious groups here. It kind of feels like it’s falling apart now, tho - so many factions that only demonize the other side.
    I think it’s all about power. Some groups want more power because they have been oppressed (Latinos, Gays, etc) Some groups don’t want to lose existing power (Whites, Christians, etc.)
    We as Americans used to pride ourselves on our country as a “melting pot”. To me this meant that we tolerate our differences in light of the whole society we are trying to create.
    not sure anymore...
  • Posted by:
    anon on 01/16/2011 at 10:54 PM
    great , the gun nuts are going to save everybody with their guns - NOT!

    so, what is the first sign he would notice of something going wrong if he was there earlier?
    if he was lucky, and he saw the perp rushing thru the crowd, he might of have mitigated some of the slaughter.
    But I think it is more likely that his first sign would have been the gunshots.
    And how long did it take to fire all the shots?
    30 seconds?
    he would have to notice something wrong, get over the momentary shock of it, get in range, draw his weapon, and then...?
    My point of all this is that, by this time, most of the carnage would have already occurred before he fired his first shot.

    Trained security scanning the crowd would be a much better idea.

  • Posted by:
    anon on 12/03/2010 at 3:17 PM
    let it 'be'
    as in
    how many 'b' list (and c, d, and f list) 'celebrities' can you you digitally put in one 'place'
    my brain hurts
  • Posted by:
    anon on 08/18/2010 at 1:37 PM
    polls are propaganda:
    they are designed to shape public opinion,
    not reflect it.

    The people who want to want to shape public opinion know
    the first rule of lying:
    lie big, 180 degrees from the truth.
    Then, people won't think you are lying because the average person thinks people lie small.

    think for yourself please
  • Posted by:
    anon on 08/10/2010 at 10:56 AM
    this reflects the very poor nature of 'debate' in our country right now.
    there is almost no debate going on
    no arguments
    no logic
    just name calling

    were their children in the audience?
    crude thing to say
    pretending to be strong when he is really weak

    divided WE fall