first: take the 'example' w/a grain of salt. many folks of all ilks would be in the same waters.

second: the knowing sigh speaks volumes 'tho. 'cause there are forty years (that I know of) of bad stuff if one looks. I'd be overwhelmed too...but certainly not speechless.

third: the 'sheep' thing could be used as a defense but just read all the comments here! they appear to be thought out and varied. step into a 'red' conversation is like walking into a shop full of parrots. *AWK! AWK!*

fourth: if you believe the 'blue' is programmed - then why are the 'reds' tardy in their opinions when unexpected events happen? when this FBI bust went down, even Fox was befuddled - and many other times too.

five: I put forth the theory that the 'red' can't speak for themselves because it's foreign to them. (see above)

six: when it was Hillary w/less - it mattered. now that it's Upset Catsup w/top secrets, leading a coup, etc, etc, etc (see other comments) - it's just opinions. right?

the cultism is real and in your neck of the woods.


but for me, the first thing that made me anti-orange was him and the USFL. forty years ago!

'indoctrination'?

you were told that. you believed. you speak it. 🦜AWK!

AND THE LIES!!!!!!!!!!!


BTW: credible news (or reality) that one fears, dislikes, or is disillusioning isn't a choice. one doesn't get to say the dam didn't break when the town is flooded and the dead are floating by. ones that do...well...

Gonna help you get through this...

Bongo isn't worth the spit. Sharing nothing as he has no grasp of history. I do...but am fairly well-read...and am open to learning the good/bad/ugly of American history. Check out the '60s and the LBJ administration. Find a book by a real historian. Answers should come by seeing it for yourself. Or, magically, given the chance to think about it objectively.

will admit was against Uncle Thomas from the beginning. anyone w/sense knew a black man was going to be appointed but who he was replacing was almost too much to bear (like the scene in Raiders of the Lost Ark - a jewel for a bag of dirt). never appeared to me to be overqualified or a cognitive powerhouse. believed he'd be what he is. seat filler.

so was biased in that regard. knew how to judge the judge.

in a wider view - we are all biased in some regard. hard not to be. science has shown even our brains give us bad info. racism exists everywhere - no one group is immune. 'tho some use it as a tool to get other tools to act like fools (ex: Jan 6). i.e. don't use bias to prove bias. like trying to wash in dirty water.

Can't help w/the other vids 'cause they smell of BS. Open-minded doesn't mean Open Holed. Don't have to be an outhouse. Don't want to step in it - why roll in it?

During my flight training, I was always taught that a highway or paved road was the last place to land in an emergency. For one, power lines tend to cross paved roads and by the time you can see them, it's too late to avoid them. Another is that it endangers others on the ground. Many pilots lose their lives trying to save the plane in an emergency. The best advice I got during my training was that when the plane quits on you, it's now your life boat. Use it to save your life, don't risk yours to save it.

During my flight training I also worked at a small GA airport. I got to know a lot of the pilots there. One owned a construction company and would often fly over his construction sites to survey them from the air. He came out that morning, I filled up his plane and he never returned. I didn't think much of it, although he rented a hangar from us, he also had a private air strip too.

A few days later, I found out that he was killed making an emergency landing. While flying over the construction site, his engine quit and he tried to land on a road. A car pulled out from a side street and he pulled up to avoid it. The landing gear snagged a power line, which caused it to nose dive into the ground and rupture the fuel tanks. It caught fire, and people tried to get to him to pull him out. They said he appeared to be alive and trying to get out, but the fire spread too fast.

The way I found out was a bit shocking. Investigators from the NTSB showed up to review our fuel and maintenance logs. We have to perform daily tests on the fuel and equipment, and I was the one that did those tests the day he was killed. It wasn't the fuel that caused the engine to quit, but that thought that maybe I screwed up the test and caused it and knowing he probably burned alive haunted me. That's something I'll never forget.

Lol. Wouldn’t you like to know, since it’s correct 99.96% of the time. Lol. It would certainly do you well to read the same news I do, but I don’t think you’re capable of rationally determining fact from fiction so wouldn’t solve your problem.

It’s way more funny to me that you don’t know where my info comes from, especially since I tell you (apparently they don’t teach you how to look at listed reference material at the college you say you went to…because I list them often). Where you listen to one OAN idiots take and just believe it, I usually read 3-5 articles with different viewpoints and come to my own conclusions based on how well each relates to known facts. When I post the CNN version of a story for you, it’s because they keep it dumbed down enough for even you to understand, not because they’re the only source. (Also because I know it will trigger you into acting the fool)
🤦‍♂️

Why? Because he’s a lying treasonous traitor that tried to overthrow the American government by force and become a dictator in America. WTF?! Did you really ask “why” there’s an investigation!?
Also because so many cultists like yourself want to pretend 1) it was horrific and all ANTIFA and BLM, 2) it was just a normal day at the capitol with normal tourists and 3) it never actually happened ….so he can try again in 24, and with enough hiding the evidence, voter suppression, roll purging, triple voting, voter ID, removal of mail in voting and drop boxes in democratic areas (like Houston with 665 sq miles, 2.3 million residents, and now ONE drop box), and a complicit partisan court willing to invalidate millions of Democrats’ votes, maybe he could steal a “win”. It’s important to 1) know and 2) remind voters what he did to foment a coup against their country, and how he tried to defraud the nation and the election with his election fraud fraud that he knew from day one was a pure lie.

Why this two sided hearing with MAGA underrepresented? Because republicans didn’t want a non political third party investigation and blocked it, and didn’t want to be part of the bipartisan investigation so boycotted it. The real question is why don’t republicans want to know and don’t want anyone else to know the truth about 1/6? I think that’s obvious, because they are complicit in the failed coup.

Suppression of truth?! You mean by the Trumpists who refuse to testify, refuse to turn over public documents, and threaten witnesses to “be loyal” and keep quiet? I think that’s obvious too, they suppress the truth because the truth is they turned on their country and government to try to install their cult leader as dictator for life.

Anything and everything, by which you mean actually investigating an attack against America that cost lives….how quickly you forget Benghazi that was actually a number of one sided “investigations” (fuckery) trying to prove the predetermined conclusion that Clinton somehow was responsible for a foreign attack on an embassy…tens of millions wasted just trying to keep her from running in 16 (and I wish the totally 100% dishonest smear campaign was successful, because we would never have had Trump if he ran against Sanders). All that and still nothing on Clinton. Didn’t you promise the charges were coming any day….way back in 17 or 18?

This madman was a perfectly normal maggot. Gun crazed, immigrant hating, racist it appears, a violent nut job wrapped in a MAGA flag and Pepe shirt. That’s the MAGA base, not an outlier. I know you’ll hide from that fact and pretend he’s just a crazy nut job, but he’s perfectly normal for a Trumpist, you are all mad men, you all want to murder liberals, he just had the balls (and insanity) to go through with what most of you fantasize about daily.

So we now have publicly available testimony under oath with corroborating evidence as proof that the “stop the steal” fraud was nothing but a plan to bilk poor donors into donating more to Trump, donations spent on himself, his family, and at his properties at exorbitant rates. He asked for donations to support the “election defense fund”, which did and does not exist.

He raised around $250 million, none of which was spent in court. Most was spent on Trump organizations and businesses, and paid to his family at $20000 per minute speaking rates at events where they asked for more donations.

For instance, Guilfoyle was paid $60K for one under 3 minute introduction of her boyfriend, Don jr.

I’m 100% certain that’s not the only outrageous appearance fee they paid themselves….ex presidents usually get over $200000 for a speaking fee, what do you bet Trump pays himself at least that for every rally, speech, or appearance at Maralago out of those funds that were supposed to be paying to fight in court. The problem being that Trump knew full well he had zero chance in court because he had zero evidence of his claims, every sober advisor in the White House and his children told him so.

Will any crime, lie, or theft ever be enough for you to see Trump as the steaming pile of shit that he is? He’s been caught committing school frauds, housing frauds, business frauds, bank frauds, tax frauds, charity frauds, and political frauds….mostly against people just like you who trust him.

"CGI can alter the color and intensity of light, changing the appearance of an actor’s face or body in a shot."

this means building a digi double of an actor's face or body, match moving/rotomating it, relighting it with scene lights, then a shit ton of work in comp. NOT a colour correct or a shitty filter. it's a huge amount of work.

Oh boo-hoo. Don’t have a hissy fit.


https://www.masterclass.com/articles/what-is-cgi#what-is-computergenerated-imagery

From above….
“ 4. Special effects: CGI can alter the color and intensity of light, changing the appearance of an actor’s face or body in a shot. It can also simulate environmental effects, like rain storms or cloudy skies. CGI can also age or de-age an actor in post-production.”

Are you the layman you speak of?

HA!

this img wasn't generated by a computer. altered [slightly], yes, but filters ≠ CGI. blurring an img, using a blue filter, or cropping an image does not make it "CGI". you can argue the semantics of if it being "generated" by a computer, but arguing it is means all digital photos, images, hell even text of any kind are "CGI". "CGI" is already a stupid, near meaningless term and pushing the definition to "any image that appears or had appeared on a computer in any way" makes it even less useful. [generally VFX/visual effects is the umbrella term people are looking for. CG is the term if they're referring to rendered assets. this is neither. this poor use of language is a huge pet peeve for me.]

imma ignore the "art" argument because that is regularly a black hole of silly and i don't feel the need to engage that but those painted potatoes more effort than this.

To me, it appears the main point of Stossel's concern is that the point of view isn't balanced politically. That's fine and all, but using the accepted list of credible sources as the evidence is false equivalency.

The question of whether the sources are factual or not in their reporting is 100% different than whether the sources slant their reporting to a specific narrative.

If he wanted to make the case that all of the left/far left sites are as untruthful as the right/far right sites then he should have introduced some additional analysis of the truthfulness of the articles on the sites. He didn't do that so his comparison is basically invalid.

If you are talking policies that govern individuals, average is meaningless, you need to include the outliers. What I really said was, on average it’s somewhat true a bit more than half the time….with many exceptions, so incredibly far from a rule…far from “I can agree”.

You said “ Are you saying you do not believe that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)?”.
I pointed to one instance where (I assume) chromosomal males do not have an advantage over a chromosomal female in an athletic field….just an example of why I don’t believe it’s always true that people who are biologically male(By which I mean XY) have an advantage in athletics over people who are biologically female(by which I mean XX)..one you can’t contradict.

People are never equally gifted or talented, not even with themselves yesterday or tomorrow. I find the premise faulty.

Appears to, so far, in most but not all categories.
In many, the difference is minimal and an exceptional female will surpass males one day in most. Top ranked Kenyan woman already routinely beat top ranked non Kenyan males in long distance running, for one example.

I won’t extrapolate from a temporary skewed position, it leads to ridiculous conclusions….so I won’t be able to agree.
I can agree people believe that.

It’s not just sexual biology. It has nothing to do with genitals. It’s hormones, dna, rna, mental toughness, upbringing, training, health, environment, opportunity, etc. if someone born a woman wants to compete with men, and your position is correct, what’s the harm? If a trans woman, born male but never going through male puberty or taking estrogen and hormone blockers to reverse the effects wants to compete against women, what proof do you have to show any advantage? Two athletes excelling? Out of how many?

Now how expert are you in this field? Expert enough to define the exact point where each person has an advantage vs a disadvantage? I doubt it. But you think it’s fine to deny them the right to participate based on your ignorant assumptions. Do you accept such ignorant, biased assumptions to determine what you may do, how much you may participate in public events? I doubt you would accept it for a second. Think about that.

You want to equate them to non trans people while trying to prove how they’re so different. Pick a lane please.

No matter what your opinion, denying a citizen a chance to compete in public sports is totally unAmerican. I notice how you ignore that, as if to concede it under your breath. It doesn’t go unnoticed that you can’t address that. It IS the point.

Edit : as to the olympics, they have allowed trans gender athletes since 2004. If trans women are really men, why haven’t those records become equal between men and women?

@newtboy,

On average you can agree…

I never said anything against any given pro/competitive female athlete probably beating out plenty of biologically male folks.

I was only pointing to advantages between equally gifted/talented and trained people.

To that point, can you agree that most standing olympic records as currently separated into mens and womens records, indicate that the historical separation based on XX and XY certainly appears to show an advantage. Would you be able to agree following from that, the existence of distinct mens and womens records is because without it, women would be “unfairly” left almost entirely unrepresented in every sprint distance, every lifting record and most other records.

For instance, the Olympic qualifying standard for the mens 100m was 10.05s, while the standing Olympic womens record time for 100m is 10.49s. AKA in absence of a separate competition for biologically female athletes, even the standing Olympic record holding female wouldn’t pass the bar to qualify to compete in the Olympics.

That is the advantage I am stating exists, and matters and I am asking if you acknowledge that distinction existing as a result of biology or not?

Just gonna leave this here for you…..


Prior to his recent appearance in new Orleans Trump had sent out requests to his small donors saying, Hey, I'm gonna be in new Orleans and I want you to come with me and I'm gonna pay for your flight pay for the accommodations. And you one lucky donor is going to have dinner with me, Donald Trump himself, but you gotta donate to get into the, you know, contest, I guess you would call it. But after they got donations, Trump went to new Orleans, he talked to his donors and then he left. There was no winner. Nobody was selected. He solicited donations based on a contest that apparently they didn't even run.

Lemme guess, you don’t care he’s still a thief, stealing from his followers, nothing burger.

"Embed code appears to be invalid" when I copy and paste https://youtube.com/shorts/MfxyuK1znEQ URL.

Related URL does not appear to be a valid post URL - ignoring related request by spawnflagger.