search results matching tag: current events

» channel: learn

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.001 seconds

    Videos (45)     Sift Talk (3)     Blogs (1)     Comments (159)   

Mitch McConnell Freezes During Press Conference

newtboy says...

Perhaps, something about MAGA sure seems to cause more brain damage than a full blown meth addiction in once intelligent people, but even with functioning brains 80 year olds are not as in touch with current events, morals, or norms, nor do they have skin in the game.

It’s easy to vote for programs or projects that won’t have to be paid for, or whose deleterious effects won’t be felt until long after their death….like denying climate change. They can gamble recklessly with the future to see monetary benefits today because they won’t be here when their gamble fails disastrously in 20 years to pay the piper themselves.
I think people making the rules and laws should be expected to live under them for a minimum of 20 years, maybe more, making the age cutoff for election below 60. Nobody is getting smarter or more up to date and in tune with current events and new advanced methods of problem solving after 60.
Once upon a time experience was a valuable feature in a politician, but today the best you could say is they have lots of experience at failure and partisan gridlock no matter which party they’re in. 2 terms is enough for presidents, it should be plenty for senators, representatives, and Supreme Court justices. Professional politicians are an anathema to America, as is a political ruling class or politicians getting rich while in office, and we now have all 3 as the norm.

cloudballoon said:

Most Democrats' 80 is like the GOPers' 50 though. Most GOPers' brains already turned to mush for being lemmings, long unused to independent, rational thinkings, nor anything nearing care & compassionate emotions for the vast 99.5%.

Ukraine losing 500 troops daily in Bakhmut fight

newtboy says...

Yes, yes you have been proven wrong again. You might reconsider taking the word of the Russian military as a given. They only lie.

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/liveblog/2023/5/18/russia-ukraine-live-news-overnight-attacks-rock-kyiv-odesa

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-65662563

What happened was ONE line in the city advanced for the Russians about 500 yards, while multiple, nearly all others retreated the same distance or more, some by kilometers. Russians have abandoned the outskirts, concentrating their forces in the rubble of the city, but are nearly completely surrounded by the Ukrainian army, and Ukrainians still hold the 15% they’ve held for weeks. Wagner just declared that part unimportant and declared they had the city, without actually taking more of the city. You bought it, like you always buy anti democracy propaganda…Every. Single. Time.

Yes, you have been proven wrong again. It clearly triggered you, enough to try the idiotic ploy of just repeating Russian propaganda as fact. 😂
Everything from you in this thread, and the video itself, are direct regurgitation of pure Russian propaganda.

Such a silly boy. You have again failed current events class.

Also unconfirmed, but these reports have almost always been eventually confirmed by multiple reputable sources, while Wagner reports have nearly all been quickly debunked as pure propaganda and misinformation.

bobknight33 said:

Proven wrong again.

The dangers of a Russian energy superpower

newtboy says...

Sky News!? That’s like Fox on meth without the pretext that they’re pro-America. Foreign Anti American propaganda from an anti democracy anti America foreigner.
Love the way you love those who absolutely hate America so consistently.

Sorry, @bobknight33….the only reasons Trump didn’t start any wars (and boy did he want to) are 1) his advisors repeatedly talked him down from most, but not all provocations (how we avoided war in Iran I’ll never know, multiple assassinations often lead to war, especially when you murder generals and their entourage on foreign soil.)
And 2) he never contradicted or stood up to our enemies, he courted, praised, and capitulated to them completely. Why would Russia go to war when we completely ignored their invasions and expansion and took their word over our own intelligence community?

Derp….the pipeline Trump’s whining about was cancelled by the Germans. How great an idea to have them spend billions then cancel certification!

I know you have the memory of a meth head gnat, but come on, Bobby. Are you really that clueless….oh wait, yes you are. You just claimed Russia didn’t invade under Trump a day or two ago.

You didn’t just fail current events and history class here, Bob, you got a 12% average. Once again, you make it impossible to believe you graduated from an American college, difficult to believe you graduated high school. So sad.

Mark 38 Machine Gun Hits Small Boat Targets

TheFreak says...

Except, this time the armed public seems to be joining the tyrannical government as it turns away from the constitution.

So now any 17 year old with patriot fantasies and enough allowance money to buy a weapon becomes a constitutional scholar who can decide what's best for the country? I'd rather rely on our constitutional checks and balances. Even though current events are revealing flaws that can be exploited by a determined political faction, it's better than an angry, propagandized, armed mob.

Mordhaus said:

...as long as we have the right to own semi automatic rifles with high capacity clips, we still can pay lip service to an armed public that can dismantle a tyrannical government...

Emergency services trying to escape a burnover in Australia

eric3579 says...

Here is the original (from 2015),longer and better quality video. Seems to me that whomever uploaded this video to Youtube, cropped it down so the date and owner of the video would not be shown. My guess is they are trying to pass it off as current events to hustle those sweet YouTube views. https://videosift.com/video/Overtaken-by-Wave-of-Wild-Fire
Anyway is a dupe of the above video

(edit) After looking at this yt channel "savage entertainment", it seems obvious they just repost other peoples videos.

Back in Black - Social Media Helps Measles Make a Comeback

eric3579 says...

When i saw Daily Show, Lewis Black and Measels all i was hoping it would "achieve" is making me laugh. At least that's why i watched it. In general, whenever a stand up comedian talks on a current event or divisive topic, I don't think of it as seriously attempting to educate folks. I however agree with what you're saying.

ChaosEngine said:

As much as I approve the message, and as fun as it is to call pro-plague people idiots, I’m not sure if this actually achieves much.

There’s plenty of research that says that this kind of antagonistic approach just entrenches people further in their views.

Why Should You Read James Joyce's "Ulysses"

LukinStone says...

I took a Joyce Major Authors class in college (about 15 yrs ago). We read Dubliners and Portrait in their entirety, and probably about 40% of Ulysses and excerpts from Finnegan's Wake.

For some literature, you really need to do homework to appreciate fully. You'll miss a ton if you don't know history and current events that people were generally aware of at the time. And, even when you do that work, sometimes you still won't get it all - which is how I see Finnegan's Wake.

My experience reading (some) Ulysses was great, but it depended on the professor who would assign a chapter for homework and then spend the entire class going through it with us. We were Lit majors, so we knew The Odyssey, but some references were completely over our heads. Like, Bloom is humming advertising jingles throughout the book - and these weave together with other literature references, sometimes making a joke about popular culture, sometimes taking a swipe at literature/history. I got maybe 10% of the significance during my initial, solo reading.

My mid-term paper was a super close reading of one small section (I think it is in chapter 4) where Bloom is in the tub, contemplating how his dick and balls look like a lily pad as they are floating in front of him in the tub.

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

Lol, I read "imaginary Hiller" (and assumed you meant Hillary). My bad.



We have reasonable laws already.
Most things people ask for either already exist (and anti-gunners just don't know because they don't have to follow those laws), or only screw collectors and sportsmen while not doing anything to reduce risk (which I already covered, I assume you read the earlier part, eg California compliant AR15, etc).



Nobody expects to need to form a militia.
Nobody expects the country to go to hell.

The seat belt analogy is about preparedness for unlikely events.
Like, you don't "need" flood insurance in Houston - unless you do.

Owning a gun also hurts nobody.
By definition, ownership is not a harm.

Almost all guns will never be used to do any harm.
The very statement that "guns are all about hurting other people" is a non-empirical assertion.

Just shy of every last gun owner doesn't imagine themselves as Bruce Willis. Asserting that they do is a straw man.


You remind me of Republicans that complain that Black people are welfare queens (so they can redirect money out of welfare). Or Republicans that complain that Trans people are pedophiles in hiding (so they can pander to religious zelot voters). Creating a straw man and then getting mad about the straw man (rather than the real people) is self serving.


* Only the rarest few people think they are Roy Rogers. That is a straw man that does not apply to just shy of every gun owner.
* You don't need a gun for home defense... unless you do.
* Differences in likelihood of death armed vs unarmed is happenstance.
(Doesn't matter either way. Googled some likelihoods : http://www.theblaze.com/news/2013/02/15/how-likely-are-you-to-die-from-gun-violence-this-interesting-chart-puts-it-in-perspective/
You'd have to suffer death 350'000 times before you're at a 50/50 chance of your next death being by firearms.)
[EDIT, math error. Should say 17'000 years lived to reach a 50/50 chance of death by firearms in the next year]
* Technically, even 1 vote gets someone elected. You don't control who is on the ballot.



NRA and NSSF are on life support. They have to fight the influence of ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, most major newspapers. They are way outclassed. Current events don't help either.
The "big bad NRA" rhetoric is just that, rhetoric. As is the rhetoric that the NRA only represents the industry.

-sceherazade

ChaosEngine said:

WTF does Hillary have to do with any of this?

Let's be very clear here. No-one is talking about banning guns (and if anyone is, they can fuck right off). Guns are useful tools. I've been target shooting a few times, I have friends who hunt. I wouldn't see their guns taken from them because they are sensible people who use guns in a reasonable way.

What we are talking about is a reasonable level of control, like background checks, restrictions on certain types of weapons, etc.

BTW, you might want to actually read the 2nd amendment.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"

None of these people are in a well-regulated militia, and in 2017 "a well regulated militia" is not necessary to the security of the state, that's what a standing army and a police force are for.

Your seatbelt analogy also makes no sense at all. If I drive around without a seatbelt and crash, the only one hurt is me (I'm still a fucking inconsiderate asshole if I do that, but that's another story). Guns are all about hurting other people, so it makes sense to regulate them.


Fundamentally, the USA needs to grow the fuck up and stop believing "Die Hard" is a documentary.

You are not Roy Rogers.
You do not need a gun for "home defence".
You are more likely to be killed by a criminal if you have a gun than if you don't.
And the most powerful weapon you have against a fascist dictatorship is not firearms, but the ballot box.

The irony is that while your democracy is increasingly slipping away from you (gerrymandering, super PACs, voter suppression), you have a corporate-funded lobby group protecting your firearms.

USA and russian relations at a "most dangerous moment"

vil says...

@enoch
I did my best :-) I honestly feel threatened by this attitude of feeding the bear crumbs and pretending he is a friend. Also cant help liking Abby, so very disappointed.

@newtboy
For russia Assad is a (replaceable) puppet, bolstering Assad is just using that puppet for their own needs. ISIS is a threat because it directly supports terrorist groups within Russia. Sending in their air force and that coal powered smoking joke of an aircraft carrier was a military excercise with minimal losses and huge political and home security gains. Expensive though.

One cant just send in a task force to take out a dictator simply because one believes it would be the right thing to do. Countries generally have a limitless supply of local mafioso would-be dictators or religious leaders which the local population prefers to foreign rule. Religion and politics are just a thin veil for local tribal wars. In spite of Syria being a fairly civilised country before the current events I doubt there was ever a "democratic" alternative to Assad. Sometimes you just get lucky and the dictator decides he wants democracy (South Korea, Chile, Gorbatchev inadvertently).

F**k the whole middle east actually IMHO, twice. The Kurds never get any love from anyone and they´ve survived in the middle of this crazy shitstorm for millenia. Yet they will never have a country of their own. Even "Palestinians" created only in the last few decades appear to be closer to that goal. Not fair at all.

Two Veterans Debate Trump and his beliefs. Wowser.

Drachen_Jager says...

"We need to find out how many vets are willing to do war crimes. Jesus."

You don't really follow current events, do you?

Since the Vietnam war, American soldiers have been rigorously trained to act instead of think. It's been very successful. So successful that the US is now the best country at the world when it comes to killing your own and accidentally targeting civilians. In the first gulf war, 12 Bradley AFVs were destroyed, NINE of them were by US troops. I saw a video during that war of a spotter for an A-10. Even on the poor-quality video we could see it was a Bradley (this was while I was working with an Armored regiment). The A-10 obliterates the Bradley and all the on board were certainly dead, he calls back over the radio, "I believe that was a friendly, over." To which the spotter says, "Oh shit, I was afraid of that."

Your soldiers kill eachother without fear of repercussions. Why the hell would they worry about war crimes against other people?

Januari (Member Profile)

muslim rape game has come to europe-taharrush gamea

enoch says...

@vil

i did link a few articles that address much of what you have written.
i agree that fearmongering solves nothing and just exacerbates an already tense situation,but bickering about who is actually to blame while women are in danger i find just as ineffectual.

so far there have been 381 confirmed cases of sexual assault,and that is far too many.women should not be forced to live in fear walking in their own cities un-escorted.

man..i feel i can't win lately.
if i post a video that addresses complicated and nuanced human interactions and culture,but tends to be long (because human issues are not easily quantified)..then people complain the video is too long.

if i post a short video that just brings a situation or current event to light,then people complain it is propaganda.(even though i provided links from multiple sources).

i swear i am charlie brown.cant win for losing.

Just your everyday harassment, courtesy of the NYPD

GenjiKilpatrick says...

I call you a racist @lantern53 cause YOU ARE A RACIST.

I love Videosift.

You & Bobknight & formerly Quantumushroom ruin my experience of an otherwise engaging discussion of current events.

It's bad enough that everytime i go on Reddit, I have to read thru thousands of thinly veiled racist comments..

But like a said, you don't care that your racist.

So, if you're gonna annoy and frustrate the fuck outta ME with YOUR willfully ignorant comments.

I'm gonna dig into you untill you learn that it's extremely offense & not-okay to publicly voice those stupid opinions.

Especially considering, YOU"RE A COP!

Goddamnit I hate racism & racist.

Jon Stewart Rips NYT Journalist On Iraq War Reporting (pt2)

newtboy says...

Ahhh. I have not seen that targeted 2004 election poll, only the other polls and studies about overall current events. What those polls showed was that those that watch his show are (on average) more informed than those who don't, and yes, that could be from other sources, but it was those other sources' viewers/readers his viewers were being compared to, so at least his viewers are more curious and better at filtering BS than those that don't watch him, if they aren't getting better information directly from him.

Yes, I do understand he does not purport or even try to be a news show, which makes it all the sadder to me that, in reality, he is apparently the best "news" show our country has to offer these days...and he does that while being a comedy show. That's TERRIBLE, I hope you agree, and is much more a statement about the sad state of "news" organizations rather than his investigatory prowess.

If he were trying to be a news show, you could point that finger. Because he simply creates the most informative (or at least the most curiosity provoking) show without being or claiming to be "news", he is totally immune from that pointing finger. Fox, conversely, does claim to be straight "news", and it's viewers have repeatedly been shown to be less informed than those that watch/listen/read no "news" at all, far less informed than those who watch Stewart. Make of that what you will.

Mordhaus said:

No, a couple of polls have shown his viewers to be more knowledgeable about current events, not taking into account other possible sources of their information. Another poll showed the exact opposite regarding his coverage of the 2004 elections. The show's writers and Mr. Stewart himself both do not consider the program to be a source of actual news per their own statements.

The show covers news that it's creative talent wishes to satirize, which means if we are going to criticize Fox for skewing the outlook of it's viewers, we must point the same finger at TDS.

Jon Stewart Rips NYT Journalist On Iraq War Reporting (pt2)

Mordhaus says...

No, a couple of polls have shown his viewers to be more knowledgeable about current events, not taking into account other possible sources of their information. Another poll showed the exact opposite regarding his coverage of the 2004 elections. The show's writers and Mr. Stewart himself both do not consider the program to be a source of actual news per their own statements.

The show covers news that it's creative talent wishes to satirize, which means if we are going to criticize Fox for skewing the outlook of it's viewers, we must point the same finger at TDS.

newtboy said:

The thing about that is that his show has repeatedly been shown to educate viewers on the actual facts of the 'news' far better than the "real journalists" you would put before him. He presents the news in comedy fashion, but still in a much clearer, often more in depth, and more honest way than nearly any "news organization" operating today.

So it IS actual news, and more so than most "news" shows. Incredibly more so than, lets say, Fox, which is worse than watching no news at all, proven time and time again.



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