I know this is bucking the trend, but: Yeah, where did the kid get all that aggression and yelling from? Clearly the dad didn't raise him that way he says, as he yells in escalating rage.
Great job making the kid accountable, but poor job modelling. My kids would have been made to apologize and then voluntold for a week cleaning up the store and stocking shelves after a written apology and a handshake. And the main emotion they would get from me is disappointment, but eventually pride when they completed everything. Speak softly and carry a big stick.

Well I have heard he carries a big stick around this place. But I'd hate to ball it up if I did that. Might make him go nuts and then I'd get the sack.

I think we have a lot of deluded posters here that are unaware of just how much propaganda we're inundated with in the democratic world. In a democracy you have to propagandize to people in order to get them to do what you want. You don't have a tyranny and a big stick to force them, you have to "Manufacture Consent" or the bewildered herd.

So what some people are doing is pointing out rightly that what is portrayed in media is up for criticism. The fact that some women have done it and are being driven from their homes by threats is a travesty. And it's pathetic to see whatever lame defenses the people in this comment section have come up with.

I've tried very hard to stay out of this GamerGate bullshit because frankly people are just stupid, even when they think they're being even handed about it. Apparently context means nothing to those who are privileged, yes that's you.

"Hamas....and Isreal are both equally to blame" Just absolute grade A bullshit. Israel is the cause of the conflict, the aggressor, the expansionist, the bully, the big stick, and (you'll love this) the Nazi in this situation. Hamas is born from Israel's actions as a misguided attempt at retaliation/defense.
When deaths are 30-1, with over 80% of the 30 being civilians (and 0% of the 1 being civilians, there's no such thing as an Israeli civilian), one side is far worse.
Once again, because you can't seem to understand, complaints about one party in a fiasco do not equate to support of the other party's methodology. Jumping to that conclusion is the epitome of ignance (once again, meaning intentional, un-fixable ignorance).
OMFG, really?!? Hamas uses their casualties as "propaganda", equated to Israel's over sold lies about their unconscionable actions that CAUSED those avoidable civilian casualties? Damn, you really have your head up Israel's ass so far you can't see reality at all, huh?
For it to stop, the perpetrators must see themselves for what they are, the perpetrators. That is why fault must be assigned properly, only the perpetrator can stop what they are doing, and they must understand their own horrendous actions to want to stop. Assigning them blame at least gives them the opportunity, if they could only open their ears and minds enough to see past their side's propaganda. Yes, I mean Israel.

Ok, let's change the territory. Forget Muslims and Al Queada and the Middle East and all that.

Let's roll the clock back 30 years, and let's find a comparable scenario where we have stateless actors living in a country who's reluctant to extradite them (either through inability to locate them or because they don't really like the country asking for extradition). These actors are responsible for a number of atrocities committed in the name of a political cause that has some tacit support by the locals of this country.

So we have the IRA hiding in the Republic of Ireland for bombing civilians in Northern Ireland and Great Britain.

Now let's assume the British have drones. Is it acceptable for them to drone strike targets within the Republic leading to civilian casualties? If not, why not?

Hell, let's go forward 20 or 30 years to when Iraq or Afghanistan have drones and the USA refuses to extradite the people that illegally invaded their country and then committed crimes against humanity there. Is it ok to drone strike Texas to get to GW Bush?

This is not a door we want to open. You're happy with it now because you're the ones holding the big stick, but legitimising international assassination because you don't get your way is a recipe for a nightmare.

No it's designed this way, there was too much democracy in the 60s, too many kids standing up and questioning authority. The answer from the Trilateral Commission, Carter was involved with it and it's considered very liberal, was that the Education sector was not doing it's job to properly indoctrinate the students. You can read about it if you like the Trilateral Commission's "The Crisis of Democracy." It's not a conspiracy it's very well laid out and open.

Saying that there is a conspiracy to control american intellectual attitudes and direction is like saying there's a conspiracy in Apple to get people to buy their product through advertising. This was recognized a century ago, when you don't have a big stick to beat the populace with you have to "Manufacture Consent."

If Reps have a better sense of "how the world works," then why didn't they anticipate the mortgage-backed security crisis? Regulation is necessary, taxation is necessary and the freedom to marry who you want to marry is necessary to build a balanced and prosperous society. The Rep contradictions of "less gov = more freedom EXCEPT for marriage rights, women's bodies and more military spending" have been exposed to the majority as the fraud that they are. Obama endured relentless personal attacks, pointless filibustering and not a small amount of outright racism, lies and disrespect in a futile attempt to make him out to be the "worst president in history."

The people have spoken. Obama still came out on top, consistent to his values and gracious as he congratulated Romney on a hard-fought campaign. Taxing the top earners in the country a little more and cutting spending would be an effective way if paying down the deficit. How is this an illusion?

The Republican party needs to regroup. Their tactic of leaning further and further to the right (except in the last weeks) has soured too many right-of-center voters. If they argue now that they would have won "if only they had someone MORE conservative running," then they will surely lose again and again.

>> ^Yogi:

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
Actually, far from stupid I found him really on the point here.
Candidate A will "Give them things" ie. make their lives better.
Candidate B says, "Screw you, my rich friends need MORE!" ie. make their lives worse.
Why did anyone vote for Romney again? It's been shown time and again, Democratic Presidents have a better record on the economy, AND debt levels than Republicans. Yet this illusion remains that somehow by focusing 90% of their energy on helping 5% of the population the Republican will magically shrink the debt and make everything work, in spite of the fact that it's been tried numerous times, and it's failed every single time.

If you hear people talk about Obama and his policies they are simply uninformed about them. They're uninformed about everything whether it's what the deficit means to history to how the world even works. The PR industry works hard on producing massive amounts of propaganda and it does work. This is how you do things when you do not have the big stick like in a Totalitarian society, you have to manufacture everyone's consent.

>> ^Drachen_Jager:

Actually, far from stupid I found him really on the point here.
Candidate A will "Give them things" ie. make their lives better.
Candidate B says, "Screw you, my rich friends need MORE!" ie. make their lives worse.
Why did anyone vote for Romney again? It's been shown time and again, Democratic Presidents have a better record on the economy, AND debt levels than Republicans. Yet this illusion remains that somehow by focusing 90% of their energy on helping 5% of the population the Republican will magically shrink the debt and make everything work, in spite of the fact that it's been tried numerous times, and it's failed every single time.


If you hear people talk about Obama and his policies they are simply uninformed about them. They're uninformed about everything whether it's what the deficit means to history to how the world even works. The PR industry works hard on producing massive amounts of propaganda and it does work. This is how you do things when you do not have the big stick like in a Totalitarian society, you have to manufacture everyone's consent.

This has always been true. Simply read "Manufacturing Consent". In a democracy the government doesn't have a big stick to threaten people with, so they must use propaganda. It's been documented time and time again, they don't work for us, they don't have a best interests in mind. Everyone knows it.

I could have suspended disbelief if only the word "grow" wasn't used. If I wanted an actual big stick, I would go and get one from a tree that's already grown it.

Sarah has penis envy.

Shoe vs tarantula = a lot of mess. I think I'll go with a big stick. I can throw that away afterwards.

It's harder to forget history when you're on the receiving end of the big stick. -Yogi

http://videosift.com/video/a-message-to-all-neocons-who-booed-ron-paul

Hell I'd quit working if that thing was running uncontrolled within 200ish feet of me.

Although it is funny to see them making fun of the guys for it, and calling a 8-10 foot piece of lumber a "big stick".

Can you imagine going to the lumber yard and telling them you need a couple 8 foot long big sticks and a couple 10 foot big sticks?

It's harder to forget history when you're on the receiving end of the big stick.

Now I'm sitting here just shaking my head in bemusement, amazement, how-is-that-possiblement. Questions questions questions....

Is everything made special for his height? And surely finding skates for feet the big. And his reach... with a larger than life hockey stick.... Or is he not allowed a big stick -- are hockey sticks regulation size?

I clearly know nothing about hockey, but this guy has me awe-struck.

In reply to this comment by ridesallyridenc:
>> ^bareboards2:

Made me cry.
Then made me gape. HOW BIG IS THAT CAPTAIN?????



Zdeno Chara is the largest player in the NHL, 6'9" tall, 255 lbs. Without skates or pads. A giant.