search results matching tag: common sense

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (64)     Sift Talk (8)     Blogs (6)     Comments (1000)   

Racing for $100

surfingyt says...

Interesting... Yeah that's entitlement imo. The world is not fair and some people do get privileges that others do not get. maybe life was hard on bewb but that doesnt mean it should be for others too, or that common sense changes to better everyone overall (like a societal safety net) should be abandoned because he had to walk uphill both ways to school therefore so should everyone else. Some cant see past their own nose and are so self-absorbed they cant think of overall societal good without making it about them again.

moonsammy said:

I've seen / read some stuff around the "great replacement" concept lately. It's apparently a significant, if not THE significant commonality amongst people who both 1) believe the election was fraudulent and 2) would consider violence in response. The root causes of the worldview seems to stem from personal hardships, and from the perception of others getting advantages they didn't receive themselves. Makes some degree of sense to me, as over the course of one's life it could feel like you were treated unfairly while others were given a leg up.

It doesn't strike me as the sort of thing that can be productively fought against on an individual level. That such a worldview requires far more than just a motivating incident, but more like a life of personal experience, I don't personally see how to successfully shift someone away from it. Too damned ingrained. Our best bet, in my view, is actually having a proper social safety net that lifts everyone up to a viable baseline from which to pursue their life / liberty / happiness.

Republicans in 2018 Post-Midterm Elections

newtboy says...

I didn't come up with it. It was the conclusion of the 9/11 commission. If you disagree , your beef is with them.

I'm sorry you are so ill informed. Perhaps out might try being less dismissive and insulting about your ignorance....but likely not.

Apparently it wasn't enough time for him to grasp the seriousness. It was barely enough time to staff the NSA. They briefed him a few times, but the "Osama Bin Laden preparing to attack" report went unread or at best unheeded. Again, this is according to the bipartisan Senate commission set up to determine what actually happened.

Edit: Andy Card, Bush's chief of staff - “The 9/11 Commission had said if there had been a longer transition and there had been cooperation, there might have been a better response, or maybe not even any attack,” the former chief of staff said.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/11/former-bush-chief-of-staff-cites-9/11-warns-about-slow-transition.html

The 9/11 Commission Report noted:
"[T]he 36-day delay cut in half the normal transition period. Given that a presidential election in the United States brings wholesale change in personnel, this loss of time hampered the new administration in identifying, recruiting, clearing, and obtaining Senate confirmation of key appointees."
The point is that delaying these processes such as obtaining background checks can create significant later delays in putting new officials into place and in some cases obtaining Senate confirmations. Delays in the transference of information with the incoming team can also obstruct the next administration’s ability to carry out existing and new policies.
Perhaps you're unaware, the Bush administration, like others before it, did not have its full national security team on the job until at least six months after it took office.

Plans like watch for groups of middle eastern men who suddenly have funds to move to America, especially those who want to learn to fly, but not take off or land. Plans like track Bin Laden's money and deny people he funds from entering the country. Plans like focus on his communications to learn what his plans were. Plans like take him out before he attacks. There were many plans, I'm sure most were classified but many just common sense.

Really, you never heard the intelligence community makes plans to deal with threats?! They might not have been successful at stopping an attack, but at least could have tried.

greatgooglymoogly said:

Wow, thanks for the laugh. I thought I had heard every 9/11 theory out there. Apparently 6 months wasn't enough time to brief Bush on the Al Qaeda threat, because his schedule was still backed up from the inauguration. And the FBI and CIA were just too polite to intrude on his time clearing brush on the ranch with a vital national security situation. LOL!!!

Also, what were these "plans for Osama?" Haven't heard that one either.

FORMULA OFFROAD ICELAND, AKUREYRI 2020 Round 2

00Scud00 says...

Producers vastly overestimate most peoples' common sense, but YouTube didn't get it's start until 2005 so perhaps all the evidence wasn't in yet. For giggles I tried putting 'Humans do' into Google thinking stupid shit would be a top contender, but apparently it's "Humans do battle in a ring of jello".

newtboy said:

I think the very first one was in 65 or so showcasing rescue equipment, and it's been pretty much the same as now since 85 with two or three classes, but some serious advancements in the cars. I think our host said it wasn't televised until mid 2000's because of the disbelief from producers that people would actually do that.

What "defund the police" really means

bcglorf says...

Apologies, didn't mean to misrepresent you. We've debated things before and you seemed to lean to no cop is a good cop because there are so many bad ones guilt be association and failure to clean things up makes them all bad. You'd also said up thread to fire all active officers.

I'll cease trying to word how you feel on it, I just wanted to demonstrate by counter example that not everybody means 'reform' when they say "defund". At a minimum , the degree of 'reform' varies from change some laws and regulations to fire them and start over from scratch.

My comment of being ruled by our 'betters' was meant as a sarcastic dig on them and their abject failure in letting things rot this far and doing nothing.

Finally, my comment on public opinion on solutions being non-uniform was mostly to emphasize that as just normal, and the current status quo is just so unacceptable that it is unifying people from varied points of view to stand up against it. The most important point being that declaring, see nothing will satisfy the mob because they can't agree what to do is a twisted deception and the truth is people want things to be better than they are, and there is as you pointed out tonnes of common sense ways to go about that,

newtboy said:

You misread. Please don't speak for me, especially when you're so wrong.

I support both disband the police, which means require all police to go through the hiring process again with those with multiple or serious complaints on their record disqualified or at least forced into retraining and a long probationary period...and I also support defund the police...meaning remove mental health from their job (and fund a mental health department that is sent on mental health calls, normally without police escort), it means the SWAT team is only called after weapons are used, not pre-emptive for non-violent calls, so can be cut in half or less. It means ZERO dollars for military equipment.
It does not mean eradicating the police, it does not mean cut ALL police funding, it means remove the second, third, and fourth hats they wear, remove violent or abusive officers, and cut their funding accordingly.

Mostly I think people want enforceable responsibility, criminal and civil, not immunity. If police had no shield from their actions, they would act better instantly. That's a no brainer and doesn't cost a dime.

Edit: eradicating the police unions would go a long way towards fixing the culture.

I think the demands of the public are more homogeneous than you claim....I know so, since you mischaracterized my position to create an outlier. That said, people do have different ideas of how to fix a problem we seem to agree on....but stripping immunity seems to be nearly universal outside police and Republican senator circles.

The people running the country aren't our best and brightest, they are those narcissistic enough to think they alone can make a difference and those slimy enough to think they can take advantage of an elected position for their personal gain. Trump proves undeniably that they aren't necessarily better educated , smart, or professional.

2020 Jeep Wrangler Rolls Over In Small Overlap Crash Tests

newtboy says...

Nope. Watched them closely.
Hitting a car flat at 60 km or mph is going to stop you in <1/10 of a second. I counted >4 seconds to stop with a flop in the video. Same kinetic energy absorbed. Δv = 30mph (around 50'/sec) Δt= .1 vs 4. Do the math. 500ft/sec/sec vs 12.5'/sec/sec...that's 50g vs 1.2g. Case closed.

Fine. God forbid you listen to someone with extraordinary personal experience in this matter and a grasp of physics.
You go for the dead stop next time you're in a wreck, I'll turn my wheel.

There are variables in car wrecks. You want to compare best case scenario sudden stops with absolute worst case rolls. Feel free to think that way. It's not reasonable. I'm done.

Then look at the dummy data if immutable physics laws aren't enough for you, but no citation is needed to conclude that exponentially higher G forces cause higher level injuries, even if the angle isn't the worst possible for a specific spinal injury.

I've given you my personal vast experience, physics, and common sense. You give me apple to oranges, and exaggerate the juiciness of the apples while only mentioning dehydrated oranges. I'm done. Believe what you want, but I hope you don't have to test your theory.

wtfcaniuse said:

You might want to watch all those videos again.

Hitting a parked car at 60km/h and not rolling would be a clearly better outcome. The parked car is not a solid wall, it cannot bring you to a "dead stop".

Hitting a barrier and rolling is clearly worse than hitting the same barrier and sliding along it, "bouncing" off it, spinning etc even if you're clipped by another car. Again even with the sharp swerve into the barrier it would never have been a "dead stop"

Hitting the car in front which has suddenly braked would be far better than a high speed roll even if the car behind proceeds to rear end you. The closest to your "dead stop" scenario and still far better than a high speed roll.

I'm arguing with you because you often backup what you're saying with demonstrable facts, in this case you're not. You're ignoring variables, using differing experience to draw conclusions and dismissing the severity of something based on your controlled personal experience of it.

"Citation? Physics. acceleration = Δv/Δt. Larger injuries come from higher g forces."

Has nothing to do with studies in vehicular CSI. I asked for a citation relating to maximum force/time being a primary factor in vehicular CSI not a physics equation. Again this is the shit I'm arguing with you about.

AOC Exposes The Dark Side - "Let's Play A Game"

The sky is not the limit

SFOGuy says...

I was wondering the same thing; they buzz incessantly (that hysterical wedding drone movie send up does it best)---and doesn't that violate non-harassment statutes in a number of countries/places/safari parks? and maybe, common sense?

Sagemind (Member Profile)

Let's Talk About UNESCO & Being Your Own Worst Enemy

VaevTissue - "Train Your Immune System" With Used Tissues

Horizontal Backflip Record

Emu War - OverSimplified

White House revokes CNN reporters press pass

Briguy1960 says...

What you don't get is you don't get to say what constitutes Americas values when you only listen and watch propaganda as you put if from the side that validates your opinons.
Keep living in a fantasy world but I prefer to see things from others perspectives too.
Not simply what the biased agenda based main stream media is pushing very hard down my throat on a daily basis.
The fact you dismiss Woodward because he is on that site speaks volumes about your closed mindedness but regardless his message isn't only on there and you failed to address it.
Fox is by no means as bad you say.
Not all of it.
There are good reporters on there but you will never admit it because they refuse to spend their entire segment bashing Trump which is the only thing you and your ilk will tolerate.
The anger and emotion is real.
Now if only cooler heads and common sense would be IN again instead of this emotional garbage (from both sides btw)

newtboy said:

Fox is, and they don't get my views on purpose. I don't listen to consummate liars and blatant propagandists except to see what nonsense they're spouting in today's attack on American values.
Point me to Woodward saying the same thing on non right wing propaganda outlets and I'll listen.
Point me to another propaganda outlet, I'll ignore it.
I thought I was clear about that.
I believe the boy who cried wolf deserved to be eaten.

I also don't really care about a reporters opinion about a legal, constitutional matter, no matter which side of the issue they're on. They aren't constitutional lawyers....their opinion is meaningless noise....just like most everything on Fox.....biased opinion entertainment, not news.

'I can think of nothing more American': Beto O’Rourke

newtboy says...

That's just, like, your opinion, man. ;-)


Anyone sharing the opinion that they are protesting the flag, anthem, or America got that idea directly (or by proxy) from Trump who spouted that vitriolic lie from day one, and they were all duped by him. Sorry, that's simply fact.

I've seen plenty of interviews with active military who said the right to protest is a large part of what they serve to protect.

You should maybe talk to veterans instead of standing on what you believe they think (with no evidence). They take a knee for flag draped fallen comrades themselves, as a sign of respect.
I cannot understand anyone who's taught proper flag etiquette disagreeing with other people following proper flag etiquette.

It's far more disrespectful to wear the flag as clothing, but I would bet 1/4 of those complaining have worn the flag as underwear, wiping their shit soiled asses on and pissing on it directly, but they think kneeling is disrespectful? Come on, you must admit that's moronic.

Honorable knowledgeable veterans don't think that....they know better.

Yes, if you ignore all your training, written flag rules/etiquette, common sense, national identity, and the clear, unambiguous words describing the intents of the protesters in favor of politically motivated divisive rabble rousing from consummate liars, that's definitely unreasonable...yes.

bcglorf said:

Then IMO your deeply disrespecting the opinions of a lot of veterans. Just because Trump happens to hold a strong opinion doesn't automatically negate it. Neither does anyone sharing that opinion automatically become duped by him or some kind of protege.

There are veterans working hard to make ends meet watching guys being paid millions of dollars to play football refusing to stand for the national anthem. I don't accept that every single veteran either accepts the gesture entirely, or is a racist Trump duped evil human being. I believe there are veterans that view standing for the anthem as a sign of respect for the country and fallen comrades, and I can understand many of those people disagreeing with the gesture and wishing they'd make their protest in another way than what is to the veterans, disrespect for their country and veterans. It doesn't make them 'right' but it hardly makes them unreasonable either, no?

GUNS: Both Sides Now - Betty Bowers

greatgooglymoogly says...

"it's the assault that makes it an assault weapon" LOL. Guess we should start banning assault hammers and assault knives then.

10 yr Assault weapon ban didn't affect gun violence at all.

AR-15s aren't weapons of war, they are used by police agencies across the country.

BTW, the parkland shooter used 10rnd low capacity magazines. Looks like banning 30rnds won't do much good at all, but that's just common sense.

This gun control hysteria is the Republicans' best shot of retaining control of the house and senate. Just look at '94 when they swept into power after the clinton assault weapon ban.


You can't really show any side when you limit each exchange to a 2-sentence sound byte. Pretty pointless.



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