Recent Comments by JiggaJonson subscribe to this feed

What Happens When Liberals Run Your State?

JiggaJonson says...

https://data.ers.usda.gov/reports.aspx?ID=17854
(pick california durr)
Looks okay to me
---------------------------
https://apps.bea.gov/iTable/iTable.cfm?reqid=70&step=30&isuri=1&major_area=0&area=06000&year=2018,2017,2016,2015,2014,2013,2012,2011,2010&tableid=526&
category=5526&area_type=0&year_end=-1&classification=naics&state=0&statistic=-1&yearbegin=-1&unit_of_measure=levels
--------------------------------
^copy/paste whole link
here's more detailed information about industry in California specifically, looks like it's been growing steady for a while.

Also, note the sharp uptick in government spending starting ~2014 -current numbers late 2018

That spending doesn't account for all of the growth, but there's a parallel growth happening in the "All industry total" category, defined as - "The All industry total includes all Private industries and Government."

@bobknight33
I still think you're a russian troll making the rounds.

Yesterday Trailer #1 (2019)

Trump publicly blows his cover for national emergency

JiggaJonson says...

@newtboy
@Drachen_Jager
@simonm
@bobknight33

You guys are letting him get away with too many ill defined terms.

@bobknight33 needs to define
Republican-
RHINO (dependant on Republican definition) -
Corrupt-
"Lose" in the political sense (as in "Trump does not back down or lose much")
"Back down" same comment
Swamp

--------------
From my point of view, the definitions would be as follows, but I doubt he would agree, so the definition s actually need to come from him if there's ever to be any REAL communication here.

Republican- Fiscal conservative, functional but minimal government, patriotic and supports the democratic process over communism, law and order, often (but not necessarily) religious

RHINO (dependent on Republican definition) - Ron Paul and Ron Paul Jr. - Libertarians in the thinking of Ayn Rand who actually consider themselves the "true republicans" but are outside the mainstream

Corrupt- Promoting self interest over that of the people you are meant to govern - in Trump's case, I'd say it means "anyone who doesn't agree with me"

"Lose" in the political sense (as in "Trump does not back down or lose much") - Not passing legislation with any staying power, being defeated in the Legislative Branch after something is passed (See the Affordable Care Act for the opposite example)

not "Back[ing] down" same comment - I'm going to break the law or established political norms


UNTIL WE CAN AGREE ON TERMS, THERE WON'T BE ANY ARGUMENT OF SUBSTANCE BECAUSE YOU SIMPLY WON'T BE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME THINGS

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

I'm sorry, you have misunderstood me.

What I mean to say is that your post that included the example does not contain an actual example, only a generalization devoid of any reference.

I don't trust that you are a reliable source of information on the history of Saddam Heussane's use of torture and whether or not his results could deem an interrogation effective.

You are speaking generally enough that I'd like evidince I can inspect for myself before I take your word on this or that point being factual or definite.

In other words, I did read your comment and found it unconvincing in terms of substance.

Or in other words, I don't believe you know what you're talking about.

bcglorf said:

Would you do me the courtesy of reading what I say before rejecting it?

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

I suppose that depends on the definition of demonizing and on my intent. As I said, it's not just an indictment of Pixar but children's film's more broadly. Its limited in scope because of the forum.

I'm not sure how to respond to your second comment about what I fear. That seems like some sort of red herring and I haven't attacked any sifters. I don't feel like the commentary on Pixar film's is an attack either, I doubt they realize what they're doing beyond adding what they think will be a salacious plot point to a movie.


I suppose I fear being surrounded by dumb internet trolls, but hey, all I can do is be straightforward, honest, and as factual as I can be.

BSR said:

So you admit you are in fact demonizing. How does that make you any different than the thing you fear? Do you even know what you fear?

And yes, that was worth mentioning.

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

@BSR
@bcglorf
@newtboy

It's also worth mentioning I don't want to just demonize Pixar, there exists an abundance of examples outside of the Pixar studio. The most obvious among them is in Shrek


Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

@bcglorf

Use is not evidence of efficacy. Ask the homeopathic medicine industry about that.


I'd like to see some solid evidence of torture producing the results you'd want to see. A closely guarded secret revealed only after X amount of hours on the rack or under the water board.

From what I've read, universally, people who are tortured see their torturers in a rapidly increasing negative light. What could your worst enemy do to get you to betray a good friend? What if you began to harbor feelings that were even more I tense hatred for your worst enemy and they wanted you to betray your best friend? Would you be more likely to work with them then ?

I think the premise itself is flawed when it comes to torture, and more importantly the evidence is on my side.

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

One last note, of all the scenes there was only one I didn't let my daughter watch.



It too closely resembled her cough assist device

see next comment

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

I understand. I'll grant that it seems a little "helicopter-parent" like to worry about this sort of thing. However, I do not agree that the transgressions are as harmful OR harmless as you suggest.

The Toy Story Examples again.
The one from Sid is itself an allusion to Star Wars where Darth Vader is torturing a soldier for information about the rebel base locations. If I'm not mistaken, that person is force-choked to death after his mind betrays him and gives Vader the info he needs.

Buzz approaches Woody after Sid steps out and commends him after the fact. "A lesser man would have talked under such torture."

Here is the encouragement. It doesn't matter if Sid is a good or a bad guy. Although, arguably, Sid isn't really a villain - just a kid who likes to play rough with his toys. But that's a different argument. I believe the encouragement is in the promotion of the idea that, put bluntly, torture is effective.

It's this idea, whatever the character motivation is at the time, nomatter who the character is, that encourages the use of torture as an acceptable means of extracting some kind of cooperation from the person being tortured- which is simply NOT true.

Why the pattern? why can't he be just ripping apart his toys like he did with the doll earlier?

I'm not fishing for 'micro agressions' - I'm against promoting the idea that torture works.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/12/08/world/does-torture-work-the-cias-claims-and-what-the-committee-found.html

"Time and time again, people with actual experience with interrogating terror suspects and actual experience and knowledge about the effectiveness of torture techniques have come out to explain that they are ineffective and that their use threatens national security more than it helps."
https://www.outsidethebeltway.com/an_fbi_interrogator_on_the_effectiveness_of_torture/

I argue that presenting torture as something that DOES work encourages policy decisions that allow for torture as a means to an end. When in reality it's simply just some kind of revenge driven harm propaganda.


https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/we-rsquo-ve-known-for-400-years-that-torture-doesn-rsquo-t-work/

bcglorf said:

I kind of swing the other way on this. We live in a cruel, violent, unjust world. Talking about that is not automatically an endorsement of it. Making jokes about it is part of talking about it and an important coping mechanism. Yes, talking and joking about it CAN be done in a way that encourages it, but it's NOT automatic.

As per your Toy Story examples, the ultimate take away for the young audience exposed to it is that the violence/torture was a clear cut bad thing. ...
... We need to relax a little bit about looking for micro-aggressions and 'bad' culture in every little thing that people say or joke about,

BSR (Member Profile)

JiggaJonson says...

Excuse me?
It probably sounds like I'm angry because of the subject matter I'm dealing with, but we wouldn't watch the film's of we didn't enjoy them overall. I bring it up because of is something I don't like, but I think you're wrong about this and your idea more generally.

It's not always the hero being tortured. As I point out with wreck it Ralph and Finding Nemo. So am I to believe that they want kids to identify with (in those cases) killing another character as an acceptable possibility to get one's way?

Sexual Assault of Men Played for Laughs

JiggaJonson says...

*quality

As someone who watches a LOT of kid's movies with my daughter, I notice an alarming regularity of torture in children's media.

You like Pixar movies, right? Pick a Pixar film, ALL of them have a torture scene. It's bizarre.

It's late, so I'll be succinct about these, but let's define torture as follows:
Torture - noun - the act of deliberately inflicting severe physical or psychological suffering on someone by another as a punishment or in order to fulfill some desire of the torturer or force some action from the victim

Fair?

This is a short list I can think of off the top of my head

Toy Story
Sid tortures Woody "Where are your rebel friends NOW?" as he burns his forehead

Toy Story 2
Stinky Pete tortures Woody "You can go to Japan together or in pieces. Now GET IN THE BOX!"

Toy Story 3
Buzz gets put in the "time-out chair" with a burlap bag put over his head and is forced to turn on his friends

Monster's Inc.
Mike is put in the "scream extractor" and is interrogated "Where's the kid?" as the extractor inches towards his face.

Wreck it Ralph
Ralph asks "What's going on in this candy coated Heart of Darkness?" Sour Bill tries to run away but Ralph picks him up and threatens to lick him. "I'll take it to my grave" "Fair enough" and Ralph pops Sour Bill in his mouth "Had enough?" "OKAY OKAY I'LL TALK!"

Cars 2
The green-gasoline in his tank, the spy car is put in front of the radiation shooting camera and is interrogated about who the other spy is and who has the information about the green gas he recovered that could unravel their plan to get revenge for being discriminated against for being "lemons." His engine explodes (he's killed?) in spite of giving up the information.

The Incredibles
Mr. Incredible is restrained via some black goop and asked about his family's whereabouts on the island.

Finding Nemo
Near the end of the film when Dory finds Nemo but Marlin has wandered off thinking Nemo was dead, they need to know which way Marlin went and come across the little crabs sitting on the pipe "heyyyyyyyyheyyyyyyyyyyheyyyyyyyy" "Yeah I saw where he went, but I'm not telling you, and there's no way you're gonna make me." Dory lifts him up and threatens to feed him to the seagulls sitting on a small rock until he starts screaming "OKAY ILL TALK ILL TALK HE WENT TO THE FISHING GROUNDS!!!"

I could go on, but I hope to make this simple point:
These films do NOT have to include a torture scene. It's simply odd to me that it appears so often, instilling the idea early on that torture works for getting information or cooperation out of people.

Finally, I point to one of many pieces of research on the matter https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5325643/

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

JiggaJonson says...

@enoch

Exactly

For these people, it's not about "how am I gonna pay my X bill on time? I better do something corrupt"

It's more like
"I want more X Y Z in my life. I want more free time. I'll pay someone to do X for me so I'll just have more free time to do with what I please."
It's freedom.

A Bridge Between the USA and Russia

JiggaJonson says...

You know, the history of communism is complicated. The idea in principle seems nice enough, a government where everyone owns everything. Or as Marx puts it: "all property is publicly owned and each person works and is paid according to their abilities and needs."

But in reality, it's never been implemented. It's invariably the case that a ruling party emerges as the de facto "we'll make sure everyone is following the rules so that everything is fair and as soon as it's clear that everyone is following the rules, we'll relinquish power completely to the people."

Except...that second part NEVER happens. Russia? China? North Korea? Those are communist countries in name only. In reality, those are all totalitarian states by any definition. Any opposition to the ruling class when they are questioned ends in murder or massacre by the state; see https://newrepublic.com/article/117983/tiananmen-square-massacre-how-chinas-millennials-discuss-it-now

Freedom of political thought, religion, matters of economics are simply unavailable under "communist" rule.

There's decidedly very few ideas that are less democratic and less American than communism.

@bobknight33 you claim to be a patriot, I think you're a Russian troll who's assigned to this corner of the internet. Go preach your anti American propaganda in between borscht bites somewhere else please.

The Pinkman Goo Strain - Strain Stories

JiggaJonson says...

During this whole thing I kept thinking "this host looks like she smokes dat goo"

When I saw that joint in her hand ... Illuminati confirmed.



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