NYCmetsfan
Banned
Damn you!:lol
But best tweet of the night by far
Edit this is a good second
"@Dennis_Kucinich: #KissForPeace http://t.co/sdcZUeLDSs"
Damn you!:lol
"@Dennis_Kucinich: #KissForPeace http://t.co/sdcZUeLDSs"
My wife called this before the ad was even over. I'm to the point where I almost look forward to the eruption of dipshittery after things like this and the Cheerios ad.
Guys, this is a MUST read article by TA-NEHISI COATES
The Champion Barack Obama :
http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/01/the-champion-barack-obama/283458/
Rest of the article is worth a read for anybody remotely interested in conversations about race.
Although I was probably the most vocal proponent of the establishment's importance during the 2012 cycle, the establishment is not an omnipotent, singular entity. It is not static. It is prone to fracture and indecision under certain circumstances. And if the reports of internecine conflict within the GOP are true, this might be a cycle where the establishment fails to coalesce behind a candidate. At this point, I see no reason to expect the establishment to favor Walker over Rubio or other candidates.I'm making the exact opposite argument here though. As Pigeon points out, no one is talking about Walker currently. He practically is a dark horse candidate, if you go by 2016 polls. I expect that to change.
I'd say 2016 is different from past republican fights because there really isn't an heir apparent. The Bush era is over, and everyone connected to him in any way (McCain, Romney, and yes Santorum) are irrelevant. Which means the next primary will completely reset the board, just as the 2000 republican primary reset the board.
There isn't really a defacto candidate yet. Sure, The Hill is reporting that K-Street is warming up to Rubio right now
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box...97176-gop-insiders-buying-stock-in-rubio-2016
but I'm just not buying that he's the establishment pick
A key distinction often obscured by pseudoscience and hysteria. There are fair questions about the regulation of GMOs, but evidence of adverse health effects is decidedly lacking. And as for original charge that the left also falls prey to pseudoscience, no doubt. Tom Harkin was the champion of the NCCAM. But their anti-scientific sins are typically less egregious than those of conservatives.Well the biggest concern with GMOs and Monsanto is the possibility of the latter having a monopoly on the industry especially with things like patents and suing farmers for having their crops get in contact with GMOS.. the problem is like the above example is people being unable to differentiate between Monsanto and GM technology in itself.. just because Monsanto kind of suck doesn't mean that GM is inherently evil.. just like the fact Big Pharma suck it doesn't mean drugs are inherently evil.
No, no, no x infiniti. If you need one example just look at the fat hysteria that swept over every nightly news station years ago or look at the saturated fat wikipedia page. I'm not even saying GMOs are a problem. I don't even eat organic, but you have a rosy picture of how science progresses. Maybe something unrelated (not from me) like cancer research can help you see how wild it can get.This makes no sense. If there is a health problem and something was studied and is said to not be the health problem then it isn't the health problem.
No, no, no x infiniti...
A key distinction often obscured by pseudoscience and hysteria. There are fair questions about the regulation of GMOs, but evidence of adverse health effects is decidedly lacking. And as for original charge that the left also falls prey to pseudoscience, no doubt. Tom Harkin was the champion of the NCCAM. But their anti-scientific sins are typically less egregious than those of conservatives.
So we agree that there's really no consensus.This is confusing. Now you use an example of saturated fats in which many studies claimed was bad for you (some still do) and how that turned out to be false. The problem is that there was always controversy between scientists over how bad saturated fat is, I mean hell look at the debates between healthy eating and weight loss today with the war on calories, carbs, sugar, fat, and really anything as being the main culprit.
zero shift said:Regardless it isn't like there is some secret to why we have so many health problems today, its because people are eating like shit now and aren't exercising as often thanks to junk food becoming cheaper and a general shift in lifestyle.
Richard Feynman said:"Suppose that you invent a good guess, calculate the consequences, and discover every time that the consequences you have calculated agree with experiment. The theory is then right? No, it is simply not proved wrong. Because in the future there could be a wider range of experiments, you could compute a wider range of consequences, and you may discover that the thing is wrong.
That's why the laws like Newton's Laws about the motion of planets last such a long time. You get the law of gravitation and all the kinds of consequences for the solar system, and so on, compare them to experiment, and it took several hundred years before the slight error of the motion of Mercury was developed. During all that time, the theory had been failed to be proved wrong and could be taken to be temporarily right. But it can never be proved right because tomorrow's experiment may succeed in proving what you thought was right wrong.
We never are right; we can only be sure we're wrong."
Not familiar with how Michigan is doing. How true is that ad? Has he been helping Michigan at all?
There's no question the economy is improving, however we're still at 9% unemployment despite a series of tax cuts meant to create jobs. Some parts of the state are booming, economically, thanks to the resurgence of manufacturing in the state. Unfortunately Detroit is still a mess.Not familiar with how Michigan is doing. How true is that ad? Has he been helping Michigan at all?
And this is one of the most disgusting, infuriating things about the current left: the ritualistic, fetishistic glee taken in seeking out and pillorying offensive comments made by others. I'm convinced now that (as Ghaleon more or less admits) people actually want things like this to happen because they're more concerned with posting navel-gazing The Atlantic "conversations about race" and "done with America" Facebook statuses than they are with the well-being of actual human beings.
At best, it's an utter waste of time.
Why do we pretend like it matters what one Twitter user out of millions said? You can always find someone who said something stupid if you try hard enough, but getting in a tizzy of some random person doesn't help solve racism or whatever; it's merely a social ritual so that a bunch of affluent liberals can pat themselves on the back and feel better about themselves.
We will be far better as a country when the media--traditional and social alike--stop wasting time on this nonsense and start tackling real issues and real solutions.
The problem with this view is that it is just not true in the USA. Although there are people on the left who are into organic stuff . . . those are just people.It is funny how much the left prides itself on being pro-science, while taking the anti science route when talking about food. It's not science to say that natural = good and unnatural = bad in all circumstances. In fact it's anti science to assume that just because science is involved that makes it unhealthy.
And the biggest problem is that by holding back scientific progress on foods, you're creating inefficiencies which leads to more greenhouse gases and higher food prices.
It really is one of the worst trends that belongs exclusively to the left, but if that's the worst we have, that's honestly not so bad.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/natio...ad1-11e3-916e-e01534b1e132_story.html?hpid=z1If it was a relief for Blair to finally have insurance, it was a relief for Hamilton, too, who grew up in Breathitt and worried often about fragile patients like Blair who were so often neighbors, old classmates, former teachers or distant relatives in the close-knit county. He was used to answering late-night calls from patients panicked over chest pains but afraid to go to the emergency room lest they incur thousands of dollars in bills and wind up with their name published in the newspaper, which is how the local for-profit hospital went about collecting bills.
Im always hearing, I dont want to get my name in that paper,  he said.
You misunderstand, though I didn't give you the full context. When I grew up sentiments like that were mainstream. Now, I laugh at them knowing they're becoming more and more irrelevant. Yeah they'll always be there but I love that they're so clearly making fools of themselves.And this is one of the most disgusting, infuriating things about the current left: the ritualistic, fetishistic glee taken in seeking out and pillorying offensive comments made by others. I'm convinced now that (as Ghaleon more or less admits) people actually want things like this to happen because they're more concerned with posting navel-gazing The Atlantic "conversations about race" and "done with America" Facebook statuses than they are with the well-being of actual human beings.
I read the image and laughed, nothing more. You see quite worked up on the other hand. I suggest relaxing a bit.At best, it's an utter waste of time.
Why do we pretend like it matters what one Twitter user out of millions said? You can always find someone who said something stupid if you try hard enough, but getting in a tizzy of some random person doesn't help solve racism or whatever; it's merely a social ritual so that a bunch of affluent liberals can pat themselves on the back and feel better about themselves.
Of course it won't "solve" racism, whatever that means. But racists should absolutely be outed and shamed. Putting their disgusting language on blast for millions to read on the internet will make them think twice before they publicly display racism again. Being a backward, racist shitlord has consequences in the 21st century. Letting that shit slide and ignoring the problem does nothing but enable racists.
Fair enough. I know other people who DO get really worked about this, but it seems I was incorrect in this case. My apologies.
And this is one of the most disgusting, infuriating things about the current left: the ritualistic, fetishistic glee taken in seeking out and pillorying offensive comments made by others. I'm convinced now that (as Ghaleon more or less admits) people actually want things like this to happen because they're more concerned with posting navel-gazing The Atlantic "conversations about race" and "done with America" Facebook statuses than they are with the well-being of actual human beings.
At best, it's an utter waste of time.
Why do we pretend like it matters what one Twitter user out of millions said? You can always find someone who said something stupid if you try hard enough, but getting in a tizzy of some random person doesn't help solve racism or whatever; it's merely a social ritual so that a bunch of affluent liberals can pat themselves on the back and feel better about themselves.
We will be far better as a country when the media--traditional and social alike--stop wasting time on this nonsense and start tackling real issues and real solutions.
Charlie Crist is beating Rick Scott 46% to 38%.
Charlie Crist is beating Rick Scott 46% to 38%.
Yeah, but in this case, these aren't accounts of public figures or anyone else who mattered; they're just few random people in a country of 300 million.
If an official Fox account tweeted a racist comment about an ad, that would obviously be a different story.
Again, it's crazy that it's this close
I have a different take on this than others, which is not that xenophobia is getting better, but that it has gotten a lot worse. And that it is incumbent upon those of us who are opposed to this kind of hatred to speak out lest that movement continue to grow until it snowballs into something truly nasty.
Arguably, it is just the spread of social media that makes it appear as though xenophobia and racism are on the rise. Any idiot with hands can now blast his stupid opinion to millions of others. But I don't think that's the case, or rather it's only part of the story. I think the best way to measure this is through what right-wing politicians say to appeal to people, and if you compare how Republicans talk today with how they talked, say, in the 1980s, then I think the increased organization and political power of the xenophobic right is rather apparent. Danger lurks there, and in my opinion it is imperative to be vigilant against it. So I do care what idiots say on the internet. And while that may not include an "official" Fox account (for now), it does include Fox News hosts Todd Starnes and Allen West (former congressman to boot). And no doubt others in high positions who have been cultivated and organizing the rise of this xenophobic movement.
That tweet from hilldabeast is brilliant. Just rile up the mouthbreathers a little bit over a nonscandal. I hope she drives them insane in 2016.
I have a different take on this than others, which is not that xenophobia is getting better, but that it has gotten a lot worse. And that it is incumbent upon those of us who are opposed to this kind of hatred to speak out lest that movement continue to grow until it snowballs into something truly nasty.
Arguably, it is just the spread of social media that makes it appear as though xenophobia and racism are on the rise. Any idiot with hands can now blast his stupid opinion to millions of others. But I don't think that's the case, or rather it's only part of the story. I think the best way to measure this is through what right-wing politicians say to appeal to people, and if you compare how Republicans talk today with how they talked, say, in the 1980s, then I think the increased organization and political power of the xenophobic right is rather apparent. Danger lurks there, and in my opinion it is imperative to be vigilant against it. So I do care what idiots say on the internet. And while that may not include an "official" Fox account (for now), it does include Fox News hosts Todd Starnes and Allen West (former congressman to boot). And no doubt others in high positions who have been cultivated and organizing the rise of this xenophobic movement.
jamesinclair contacted me after this permaban, and wanted to clear his name.
I thought his posts were clearly discussing the corporate view on this issue, not his own views.
SMH at #BoycottCoke trending.
I was barely paying attention to any of the super bowl ads last night... But, I am not surprised that Coke commercial riled up the idiots on twitter. Give an idiot a public outlet, an idiot will prove themselves to be an idiot.
Edit: OH GOD. Apparently there was GAY couple in the ad, also. Poor Coke. Gonna get shat on for running a decent commercial about the diversity in America.
To be fair, regardless of their reasons for doing so, the more people boycotting that awful company, the better.
I can think of more well thought out, logical reasons for boycotting Coke than to say "OMG THERE WERE NON WHITE PEOPLE IN OUR AMERICAN COMPANY COMMERCIAL. PANIC, PANIC, PANIC, DANGER, DANGER, DANGER."
Republicans want something in return for acting to avert a self-inflicted default on the country's debt, but they can't figure out what.
House Republicans discussed the issue last Friday at their annual all-member retreat in Maryland. As of Monday afternoon, they still hadn't come up with a ransom demand in order to free the proverbial hostage ahead of a late February deadline.
"We had a good discussion at the retreat, and there was general agreement that a 'clean' increase is not a good option but no consensus yet other than than," a House GOP leadership aide said on Monday.
The problem is that Republicans don't want to raise the borrowing limit without extracting concessions from the White House, but are struggling to devise a proposal that can achieve 217 votes to pass out of the House and thereby force a hostage standoff. They have 232 members, and a number of staunch conservatives don't want to vote for any debt limit hike.
Secretary of State John Kerry has lost faith in his own administration’s Syria policy, he told fifteen U.S. Congressmen in a private, off-the-record meeting, according to two of the senators who were in the room.
Kerry also said he believes the regime of Bashar al Assad is failing to uphold its promise to give up its chemical weapons according to schedule; that the Russians are not being helpful in solving the Syrian civil war; and that the Geneva 2 peace talks that he helped organize are not succeeding. But according to the senators, Kerry now wants to arm Syria's rebels—in part, to block the local al Qaeda affiliates who have designs on attacking the U.S. (Kerry's spokesperson denied that he raised the issue of supplying weapons, but did not dispute the overall tenor of the conversation.)
“[Kerry] acknowledged that the chemical weapons [plan] is being slow rolled, the Russians continue to supply arms, we are at a point now where we are going to have to change our strategy,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, who attended Kerry's briefing with lawmakers on the sidelines of the Munich Security Conference. “He openly talked about supporting arming the rebels. He openly talked about forming a coalition against al Qaeda because it’s a direct threat.”
Kerry’s private remarks were a stark departure from the public message he and other top Obama administration officials repeatedly have given in public. Shortly after the meeting ended, Sens. Graham and John McCain described the meeting to The Daily Beast, The Washington Post, and Bloomberg View. Given newly-released intelligence on the growing al Qaeda presence in Syria, as well as shocking new evidence of Syrian human rights atrocities, the senators said they agreed with Kerry that the time had come for the United States to drastically alter its approach to the Syrian civil war.
Oklahoma Governor Mary Fallin's "State of the State" address is happening now.
Trying to avoid looking at my Twitter feed so I don't smash my phone into a million tiny pieces.
It officially opens the legislative session.At 1:30 in the afternoon?
At 1:30 in the afternoon?
They have to do it when the wind comes sweeping down the plain, as per the state constitution.
Always blows my mind in this FB group I hang out in on FB and all the crazy batshit conservatives like to make a big deal about mass immigration using intellectual language.. and I'm like how fucking privileged do you have to be if "refugees coming by boat" are a big issue to you.It isn't a uniquely American issue either, fascist parties are gaining prominence in Europe as well. People in Europe are terrified of Muslims and it's really pathetic because issues like mass immigration and welfare fraud are used by the bourgeoisie to distract people from the real problems in their lives.
The uncanny timing and tone of the ad underscored collusion between oil interests and government. The Conservatives likely already knew what the report was going to say, as news of the State Department report's contents was circulating among Canadian officials in Ottawa and Washington before its official release.
The US State Department Inspector General is currently investigating a conflict of interest posed by a contractor Environmental Resources Management (ERM) who produced most of the environmental review. The firms second-in-command for the Keystone report, Andrew Bialakowski, worked on three projects over seven years for TransCanada. Koch Industries, ConocoPhillips and BP are among ERM's clients, and the State Department allegedly would not allow media to question a project manager for the report who left two weeks ago.
Over 20 members of the US Congress wrote a letter to President Obama, urging that it would be unwise and premature for the State to release an EIS prepared by Environmental Resources Management while is remains under investigation for lying to federal officials about its business connections and practices.
Almost totally lost in the shuffle was the fact that the State Department report made a major departure from its usual stance by admitting that Keystone XL would in fact impact climate change. It concluded that the total direct and indirect emissions associated with the proposed Keystone XL pipeline would contribute to cumulative global GHG emissions. It was a significant shift from its last report, which claimed that the pipeline wouldn't significantly affect greenhouse gas emissions.
Steyer wrote a letter to US Secretary of State (and well-known climate hawk) John Kerry over the weekend, asking for an immediate critical and transparent review of the EIS, and the process undertaken for its preparation.
The EIS is based on the flawed premise that Canadian tar sands oil will be developed no matter what a tired talking point pushed by TransCanada and the oil industry," said Steyer. "This is no surprise given that the contractor hired to evaluate the environmental risks of the project has direct ties to TransCanada and oil lobbying groups. But the truth is that Keystone XL is key to unlocking the Canadian tar sands and all of the carbon pollution that comes with it."
Prime Minister Stephen Harper is expected to push for Obamas approval of Keystone XL when meeting the US President personally at the North American Leaders Summit on February 19.
And if Prime Minister Harper is spending Canadian taxpayer dollars to lobby the US Government, we can only assume that he likely learned of the US State Department decision in advance and shared this information with the oil companies; or that the oil companies knew, and informed Harper ahead of time Casey said.
Environmental Resources Management, author of the report, is also a trade member of several energy industry organizations, including the American Petroleum Institute (API). API is one of the key funders for Americans for Prosperity, a tea party libertarian organization chaired by U.S. oil tycoon David Koch.
Jack Gerard, head of the American Petroleum Institute which is the largest US trade association for the oil and gas industry also appears to have known about the imminent release of the EIS ahead of time, telling Reuters that he knew when the report would come out and citing sources within the US Government. API has spent over $6 million USD on all lobbying activities in 2013 and is a vocal supporter of the Keystone XL pipeline.
As for why reporters simply parroted the oil industry's analysis of the report the Keystone XL report, political activist Jane Fleming Kleeb said that Fridays technical briefing to the media was to blame. The briefing, she suggested, led media to reach the hurried conclusion that the pipeline was determined not to greatly increase emissions, when the reality was more nuanced.
I can only hope that the State Department clarifies this point on Monday. That is the only way to turn this narrative around. Reporters didnt read the report and they wont they relied on the press briefing, which gave them the sense that this is fine for the climate, said Kleeb.
Climate cover up, collusion and conflict of interest alleged in Keystone XL report release (Matthew Millar, Jenny Uechi, Vancouver Observer)
Mud everywhere with a side of "didn't read lol".
They have to do it when the wind comes sweeping down the plain, as per the state constitution.