search results matching tag: Rose

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (543)     Sift Talk (19)     Blogs (23)     Comments (784)   

How to create a storyboard

Kevin Smith Shares A Moment With Daughter Harley Quinn Smith

African American Sisters Destroy Hillary Clinton

newtboy says...

These ridiculous women again? They make their living selling discount Trump items, so their income is totally dependent on his success, yet they balk when asked about this and pretend they're just ordinary supporters, and not paid spokespeople.

When exactly did they 'destroy Clinton' here? They made a single ridiculous metaphor that made no sense...there can be no smoke without fire? They can't really be that ignorant, can they? Do they really not know that 99.9% of the idiotic conspiracy theories their boy spouts are totally baseless rantings, and they still believe Obama is a Muslim Kenyan bent on destroying America? You can't teach that level of stupid, it's innate.

I can't see how these characters help him anyway, they are prime examples of stereotypes that many in the black community find offensive. I guess it's the "see, I have black friends" argument, made so white people can try to pretend they aren't voting for a clearly racist douchebag.
I'm still astonished at the blinders and 3" thick rose colored glasses the Republicans are seeing the world through today. You would think I would have gotten over that by now.

And did that idiot at the end really claim that if he's dead, the Democrats will cast his vote, implying that voting for a dead person is something Democrats consistently do, but not Republicans? Better check your figures there, buddy. You've got it backwards, the dead consistently vote Republican.

How High Can You Hear? [test]

Fantomas says...

15,300 through my shitty earbuds. Might try this later with my Beyerdynamic headphones to see if I get a different result.

The volume also fluctuated as it rose in pitch, I don't know if thats the headphones or my ears.

cricket (Member Profile)

British Farmer's Son Shocks Meat Farmer Dad with this video

bobknight33 says...

Death of an Innocent

This morning you were sentenced unto death
without a trial. You were conceived to die
before you had a chance to catch a breath
of life, or feel the wind, or watch the sky,
or smell a rose, or walk upon the earth.
You were so helpless and so very small,
a bit of life-to-be before your birth,
With no one here to plead your cause at all.
Last night your mother wondered, as she tossed,
if you were someone special, And she cried
for little hands, and lips forever lost;
This morning she surrendered and you died . . .
if you had lived, her daughter or her son,
Could you have understood what she had done?


And yet we care more for a cow.

The Most Costly Joke in History

What Cats Really Think Of You

how social justice warriors are problematic

bobknight33 says...

PC correctness stifles free speech.

YES using words as you describe do indeed cause better understanding of the one using those words.

People should be able to use these words. Then get the fuck beat out to them.

The only hate I have is for dumb ass liberals like you who only looks at the world with rose collar glasses.

You know all the racist words you must use them all the time.
Can you tell us a good racist joke? or how about an anti gay joke. Sounds like you can rattle them off with out thought.

StukaFox said:

Because calling people niggers, spics, retards, kikes, gimps, dagos, sand-niggers, dot-heads, crackers, spear-chuckers, nig-nogs or faggots really makes people understand each other better and leads to less violence and hate.

What's your alternative, Bob: Two-Minutes Hate and a weekly cross burning?

The Israel-Palestine conflict: a brief, simple history

bcglorf says...

Sorry, but I still can't understand. We obviously don't get to wish away history and just declare America and everybody else should've allowed more Jewish immigration and thus the Jew's that fled to Palestine were illegitimate. If we are wishing, we might as well go all out for an alternate history where Hitler and the Nazi's respected human rights and strove for peace.

Fact is that millions of Jews were trying to flee persecution in Europe(and not just the Nazi's, they were just the worst of the bunch). Fact is that the nations of the world, just like today and always, didn't want to take in nearly that many refugees. They allowed in the smartest and the richest, and that was about the line that was drawn. Truly, I can not blame the still million plus Jews with nowhere to legally escape to choosing illegal immigration to locations deemed safer for them and their families. With Palestine already having a sizable Jewish population and being closer than many other places, it made perfect sense for them to flee there. I really can't see any rational objection to this you've raised save for declaring their situation NOT that desperate or that magically we should've changed history and had everyone else act better, which plainly wasn't something the European Jews could rely upon.

As to theft of land, prior to the total outbreak of civil war in Palestine, it cut both ways. You again seem to refuse to acknowledge this. It was not just the Jews unfairly and violently dealing with the Arab Palestinians, but it was equally Arab Palestinians doing the EXACT same to the Jewish Palestinians. With the British pulling out, both parties were grabbing for land and power. You talk as though the Arab Palestinians were standing there holding out roses and snacks for the Jewish Palestinians only to find themselves shot down for the favour.

After the break out of civil war the Jewish Palestinians and refugees absolutely gained more land than they had at the outset. That is hardly the only time in history that a civil war worked out that way though. More over, when Israel accepted the UN 2 state solution, it was the Arabs that refused, allied with the surrounding Arab state to grossly outnumber the fledgling Jewish state and swore to drive the Jews into the sea. The exact quote is from Azzam Pasha, the Secretary-General of the Arab League, who declared "We will sweep them into the sea". When that war ended, Israel was even larger than when the war started. If that counts as 'stealing' land I think your a little too lose with your definitions. When a much larger alliance of nations tries to destroy a smaller one, is it really expected that the smaller nation return all land it gained as a manner of good behaviour?

newtboy said:

Yes, because I didn't say that.
I said it MIGHT have helped, not that it should have been their only option. Imagine if ALL the fighting age men that immigrated to Palestine in the 30's were on the Allied side, in place before Hitler struck. It may have made a HUGE difference in the war efforts.

I also said we (the US) should have done a better job accepting refugees, because that's what they were in the 40's. Granted, we were busy putting Japanese in prison camps, but we can do two things at once.

All that said, because things are bad someplace doesn't make it OK to take someone else's land, and that's what Israel is, stolen land. Don't take things that aren't yours, and treat others as you would have them treat you. The Zionists have broken both those rules heinously.

Bernie's New Ad. This is powerful stuff for the Heartland

StukaFox says...

Here's the lyrics from the song he should have used:

'So I looked at the scenery,
She read her magazine;
And the moon rose over an open field.
"Kathy, I'm lost", I said,
Though I know she was sleeping.
"I'm empty and aching and
I don't know why."'

Except it's not 1968 anymore; it's 2016 and we know EXACTLY fucking why we feel that way now.

greatgooglymoogly (Member Profile)

scheherazade says...

I think it's a matter of degree. Prior to WW1 (Or to say, around the turn of that century), the Jewish faithed presence was quite small. Roughly ~90% of the population was non-Jewish faithed. There was very little conflict prior to WW2, because prior to that, the immigrants purchased their land from the locals. As per the nature of humanity, the only conflict-free methods for transfer of property are : inheritance, trade/sale, or gift.

The League of Nations was inconsequential. As a result of WW1 Britain captured the territory of Palestine from its previous occupiers (Turks, by one title or another, dating back to the Roman empire), and by right of conquest could do as it pleases with it.

I refer to religious insularity, not genetic.
Yes, they are quite accepting of anyone with Jewish faith. Almost the entire Jewish faithed population in Israel, regarding this last century, is either immigrant, or born of said immigrants. The Jewish faithed population rose from around ~600k to ~7 million between 1947 and today. Even taking into account the rule of thumb 'population doubles every ~40 years', that would leave the population roughly 85% immigrant or children thereof.

Which in turn elucidates many of the issues at hand in modern times. Land prices are extreme, with more people than there is room for, so expanding for living room is a necessity. Hence colonial expansion into greater Palestine is inevitable. Further, the dramatic division in income equality puts a lot of social pressure on the government, which the government can further alleviate by expansion. A, because it can relocate those that can't afford to live in more expensive areas, and gives those people a place to busy themselves taking care of, and B, because the inevitable tensions that come from displacing the previous residents causes the government to serve as a protector from those unfortunates that were offended, which serves as a good distraction from other problems that the government isn't doing well to fix. Essentially, the same formula that nations have followed throughout history (Heck, Australia can thank its current existence for similar policies in Britain).

-scheherazade

greatgooglymoogly said:

The Jewish migration to Judea was happening well before WW2, with lots of conflict with the native population, acts of terror on both sides. The British had a mandate from the League of Nations to administer it and decided to allow this influx. And Israel isn't as insular as you believe, there is no racial purity test to prevent being "bred out of existence", they accept people who have no Jewish blood but have converted to Judaism.

canadian man faces jail for disagreeing with a feminist

newtboy says...

Isn't there actually a 'game' where you choose the picture and 'beat it up'?

It's pretty funny that they get upset at an 'internet bully', so they become a gang of internet bullies to...well...I'm not sure...get theirs? Certainly not to stop internet bullying...they're using it as a main tactic.

Can't they be sued for publicly calling him a pedophile? Do they really accuse people of being pedophiles so often that they can't remember doing it?

I have to think there's something missing here....like what he actually posted that he's being charged with. Did he make threats? Unfortunately, time and time again this kind of opinion piece leaves out the most important pieces of information. I need to see the tweet that rose to the level of charging him before I form an opinion.

It sure seems like calling him a pedophile publicly meets the criminal standard, why isn't she up on charges?

Why Wine Snobs Are Faking It

enoch says...

i am gonna call bullshit.
i am not disputing that study he referenced nor am i going to defend wine snobbery (cuz thats just being an asshole).

but i have known a few people who could tell you the varietal or appellation just by taste.

hell,twenty years ago i was running a ballroom at this very affluent country club and every year one of the main partners would come down from canada and every year me and my boss would try to trick him with a wine tasting.

we even blindfolded his ass.
and every single time he would nail it.
sometimes even by vintner!
the man was impressive.

wine snobs are just trying to keep themselves relevant,but wine is fairly easy once you know the basics:
1.the things that raise the price of wine (not make it better in most cases) is storage time and name of vintner.
2.wines can be broken down into basic categories:
dry-semi dry
sweet-semi sweet
and of course white or red.(and i guess blush/rose)

dont get all caught up in intimidating processes that are unnecessary and frankly..useless.

drink what you like,and you dont have to break the bank for a good wine.

tofucken-the vegan response to turducken

newtboy says...

You're right, I assumed (bad newt), but I must say that now that I have googled it, I'm 100% correct, there WAS only ONE vegan Olympian listed, Murray Rose, a swimmer from the 50's. (I must say that's the earliest I've ever heard of a vegan existing and calling themselves 'vegan', apparently the word began in 44).
All the others mentioned are not vegan, they are vegetarian....and I was talking about TODAY's Olympians, who are head and shoulders above 1950's athletes. Today's swimmers eat over 7000 calories a day, almost impossible as a vegetarian, and even harder as a vegan. Vegetarians aren't the same as vegans.

The only recent top notch (but still not Olympic) athlete listed was Rhonda Rousey, who had to give up on veganism to train for fights.

So my statement stands you WILL never see a vegan Olympic athlete (not you HAVE never seen one), because the level of training and competition in today's Olympics makes it near impossible, at least in active sports as I indicated originally (and in fact, vegans don't seem to be represented in the less active sports either).

eoe said:

Your Olympic athlete statement is just factually incorrect. I would think you'd google that before stating something as fact.



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon