I only unconsciously check out attractive women, but when I'm aware of my roaming eyes, I keep them off the lookers and glue em to the ones with character. This is an excellent way to get constantly laid, btw. Sorry, was that shallow? Aha!

So how shallow and insensitive do you have to be to simply ignore a whole segment of the female population based solely on their appearance?

This video is getting so much play among so-called "conscious" women about how "not enough men" are as "sensitive and empathic" as Dustin Hoffman is in this video, but all I can see is how much of a dick he was, and is only getting emotional here because he realizes his own insensitivity and how unlikely he is to change his ways...

And besides, most of the "societally attractive" women that I've met are frequently far less interesting to talk to than the "normal-looking" woman (or more uniquely beautiful ones), since the "societally beautiful" women have very little need to develop a real personality, since so much is given to them, on the basis of their looks alone..

What a shame.

I don't disagree about the snooping since 2001. As far as the koch brothers and the Tea Party, you don't know what the fuck your talking about.

They just want the Constitution follow or at least print current laws back towards it.

Instead of watching biased Democratic sucking media, go to an actual event .

They are not raciest, or the desire to go back to slavery as the media puts forth. . That's Bullshit. B.W.Y. the slavery shit and the KKK was the Democrat south doing its thing, not Republicans. MLK was Republican.


Today the Republican party is nothing more than a cheap intimation of the Democrat party. They will never win fighting that way. The Tea Party is they way to go.


FYI a little history ... Since you had a public education and hence only learned skewed left leaning revised history...


http://www.humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

"
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman’s issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act... And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican.

The Democrats were loosing the slavery battle and civil rights were breaking through and JFK/Johnson the

Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon’s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation’s fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans."


Democrats are still in the slavery business. They just use the welfare system to keep the poor poor and use the shallow promise of If you vote Democrat we will keep giving you a little cheese.

The Democrat party has been the most destructive political party to date.

There was a time when we cared about the lives of our global brothers and sisters. Now we use them as justification for our self preservation. No, no, guys, we're not simply going after Americans, we're using this to go after NON-Americans.

As if that was just.

But I'm just an asshole that screams and bangs my head against shit. Just another fuck of an American raised by indifference, learning too late and too old to change or ever make a difference beyond my own shallow, depression-ridden selfish, consumerist, game-obsessed pitiful existence. The neutrality of INGSOC: not happy enough to raise a flag and not angry enough to raise arms.

No one gives a fuck and morality is as much as you can earn and spend in a life time.

Thanks for the tip on power points you monitor lizard-esque komodo dragony beast you! I never use PPs so I didn't realize that my so called powers are confined to the videos that I've made unclean with my underprivileged caress.

I wasn't being serious at all with that second post, in fact I've come to realize the dark truth of the skillful channel in my lurking time on the sift. And knowingly fail invoked skillful in the shallow hopes that the specific channel lord would see it and be stricken with befuddlement. Also I wanted to attempt to get the goat of the impenetrable toaster-bot.

Take care.

So I am suppose to take their word for it, that there isn't a hard surface an inch below that water? They don't even zoom out, and some floaties make it look shallow.

This.
People were just as shallow when watching five hours of TV every day.
Besides, Carr's book has been debunked as being not much more than an appealing idea based on anecdotal evidence. It's just a Gladwellism. Which is why it's not surprising to see it being bought wholesale by so many.

(As a side note, another crowd that's an easy prey to Gladwellism: young adults with an annoying voice parroting ideas in Youtube videos.)

Read some of her tweets. She's either extremely shallow and arrogant, or a comedic genius. Hard to believe this is real.

Initially I had the same reaction. Then it occurred to me that this isn't "homosexuals making generalizations", it's just one person making really shallow and trite observations. A performer who doesn't have the imagination or wisdom to find deeper truths. And that performer happens to be a young gay person who hasn't yet gotten past the "self obsessive" stage of coming out. I'm guessing it would be hard to have a conversation with this woman about anything other than her sexual identity.

This is the slam poetry equivalent of a comedian getting on stage with hackneyed material:
"hey, what's up with airport security? AMIRIGHT"
"you ever notice how white people dance all bad? AMIRIGHT"

I don't get how this was slam poetry either. Is it because she repeated the same line 3 times at 1:30? Does slam poetry mean repeating yourself, sounding angry and not rhyming?

This performance makes me think that the Women of the World Slam Poetry 2013 competition had no more than 3 entrants and at least one of them was a mute.

This episode is slightly better than previous one, but still very shallow.

From yt: "John Hoover, author, takes a ride on the wild side at Nakalele point on Maui. No Hoovers were harmed in the making of this video."

And then:
"We were nearing the end of the dive and were next to a fairly shallow pinnacle when a huge set of waves rolled overhead. John was too far inside next to the rocks to avoid the rush of water as the swell created a huge vacuum sucking him up and over the rocks. The resulting flow deposited him unharmed in a large 90ft deep basin slightly north of our position. Next time I saw him was on the boat some 10 minutes later. Thought he was a goner..."

Shallow end of the gene pool...

They could have done this experiment with a smaller and very shallow pool, why feel the need to waste resources?

I'm all for what she's doing here and the art is OK.

But, oh man, her own personal commentary was incredibly trite. I don't believe a single sentence in that narration lacked shallow cliche. Some artists just shouldn't talk.

People are so shallow.