Men are a lot meaner but women are catching up.

>> ^bareboards2:

And never underestimate the evil that exists in a low-self-esteem man who needs to control his wife and children... how many men kill their own kids to punish women for leaving them? Kill the women for daring to leave them?
Not that this is a gender contest in who is worse to whom....

>> ^bobknight33:
Man, thats just mean. Never estimate the evil that exists in a pissed off woman.
I'd better give my wife some lovin.
And flowers.

And never underestimate the evil that exists in a low-self-esteem man who needs to control his wife and children... how many men kill their own kids to punish women for leaving them? Kill the women for daring to leave them?

Not that this is a gender contest in who is worse to whom....



>> ^bobknight33:

Man, thats just mean. Never estimate the evil that exists in a pissed off woman.
I'd better give my wife some lovin.
And flowers.

No government employee should ever have been allowed to unionize. What a nightmare government schools have turned out to be: expensive dummy factories promoting self-esteem over math, reading and history, with Big Government starring as Savior.

Charter schools are a half-a$$ed approach. The Department of Education needs to be abolished. Free market schools can educate kids at half the cost, without propaganda.

>> ^Opus_Moderandi:

she also happens to be cute. What is so wrong with noticing that? How does it cheapen an otherwise excellent performance by calling the performer "cute" (when they actually happen to be "cute")?


Trying to argue the merits of the title just reinforces the male internet user stereotype of a loser with the self esteem of a hollowed out coconut. Stop it!

>> ^Winstonfield_Pennypacker:

Stewart can’t admit that or his audience of smug, self-congratulatory neolibs would lose their self esteem.


I don't think you understand what "neolibs" means, given the context you use it (derogatory towards liberal-leaning thinkers). I'd suggest you actually look it up before you continue lobbing it out there as if it were an equivalent to "neo-con". It's not.

Let me Google that fer ya: http://lmgtfy.com/?q=neoliberalism

This pretty much showed how JS is a hypocrite so blinkered by bias that he personifies the very evil he decries.

Let’s call a tiger a tiger. Cable news channels have two completely different facets. One facet is the “news” update – which is when channels are announcing stuff that happens – the cut and dry stuff. The other facet is “commentary”: biased, agenda driven, subjective, interpretive, talking-head bologna that preaches to a specific ideological crowd. Whether you want to admit it or not – ALL news channels have both of these facets of News and Commentary.

Now, the cable news channels have a lot higher “Commentary to News” ratio because they are filling up a 24/7 schedule. Fox is not unique in that regard – but shares the same market space as MSNBC & CNN - about 20% ‘News’ and 80% ‘Commentary’. Whether you like the commentary of a particular channel depends on your own bias. To people who are leftists (the majority of the Sift and JS) commentary on Fox News is like garlic to a vampire. To someone on the right (such as myself) commentary on MSNBC is like salt on road rash.

If Stewart was really a true “satirist” (as he likes to say he is) then he would be mocking all sides because they both have plenty of targets. However, 99 times out of 100, Stewart focuses on the side he ideologically opposes while ignoring juicy targets on the other side. A real satirist doesn’t handcuff himself like that, so what Stewart is doing is less ‘satire’ and more ‘biased commentary’ because what he selects as subject material is driven by his biases.

Stewart can’t admit that or his audience of smug, self-congratulatory neolibs would lose their self esteem. So when presented with ironclad proof that he is biased by Wallace, Stewart CANNOT bring himself to admit it. Instead he desperately cringes behind his typical dodge of being “comedy informed by an ideological background”. What a load of honk. You were nailed Stewart. Your claimed beef with Fox News (that they are somehow ‘unique’ in commentary bias) is proven demonstrably false. Instead, it was made crystal clear that you simply don’t like Fox’s brand of commentary because it ideologically opposes your own. Kind of hurts when you can’t just mack at the camera when you get pegged don’t it? You got visibly irritable and defensive because the truth hurts.

So in this interview Stewart couldn’t dive into the tall grass of his standard “Hey – I’m just a comedian! No fair! My clown-nose is on!” coward defense. The commentary of many news channels is liberally biased just as bad (or worse) than any of Fox News’ conservative commentary. Wallace proves it in black and white. In fact there are many studies that have proven this point routinely. But Stewart can’t bring himself to SAY that news outlets he shares an “informed ideological background” with are biased because that would mean that he would have to admit that he HIMSELF is biased. So in the face of all evidence he says that hack organizations like MSNBC are not biased but “trend toward sensationalism and laziness”. I haven’t heard a weaker, more pathetic rhetorical dodge in a long time.

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/993/who-knows-news-what-you-read-or-view-matters-but-not-your-politics

Of course Stewart doesn’t want to mention polls like this that prove that FOX patrons are about 2X as ‘informed’ as people on MSNBC, NBC, CNN, ABC, or CBC. He doesn’t want to talk about the fact that Couric’s audience is about as ‘informed’ as the average reader of the Inquirer. Of course Stewart isn’t going to admit that people who listen to LIMBAUGH are more informed than his audience. No – like Obama – Stewart only sticks to isolated, biased polls that favor his own personal world view - and ignores the evidence to the contrary. BIASED.

If you’re a fan of Stewart then bully for you. He can be entertaining sometimes, and he even has the occasional decency to admit (albeit sarcastically) his own problems – such as with the whole Weiner scandal. But those of you who are patting yourselves on the back pretending that he somehow ‘skunked’ Wallace are living in a self-insulated fanboi fantasy world.

Wallace made his point. Wallace never tried to say Fox News doesn’t have biased commentary on it. Wallace proved conclusively that other news channels – including Stewart’s own show – are primarily driven by biased commentary rather than news. To the world, Stewart proved that he cannot bring himself to simply admit that left-wing, neolib commentary is biased. Thus, proving to all that Stewart himself is an untrustworthy, intellectually hypocritical, biased tool. Game, set, and match to Wallace. Now Stewart can slink back to his show and lick his wounds by selectively re-editing reality so he doesn’t look quite as big of a tool – as is his wont.

Bell curve aside, there seems to be a whole generation of idiots with zero respect for lawful authority and an inbred incapability to obey simple instructions, as if these traffic stops are the first time in their entire lives they've been told 'NO' or someone has asked them more than once to comply. Help! My self-esteem has been violated!

Another theory is these a-holes are looking for a payout from the city. They know that--right-or-wrong--they'll get one if they look like big enough victims.

In this scenario, you have an ignoramus wearing a giant pullover which could conceal any number of weapons, and a hatchback where anyone could be hiding with a firearm just under the back window.

Iggy should be billed by the city for the electricity and Taser cartridges for the exact amount of shyster "damages".

She's cute, too. Proof that cute chicks have low self esteem, so don't be afraid to be confident, guys!

I see what you are trying to say. I don't think you can distinguish from eyeballing, though. There is a third category to keep in mind: the brother who holds his head up in defiance in response to the attitude of some patronizing white person. The could happen across both of your hypothetical groups.

>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.


If you agree that holding your head high because you hold 3 jobs to put your kid brother through school and holding your head high because you have a gun in your pocket are two different things, then you'll understand what I'm saying. Those two different attitudes are visibly noticeable too.

>> ^longde:

I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.



If you agree that holding your head high because you hold 3 jobs to put your kid brother through school and holding your head high because you have a gun in your pocket are two different things, then you'll understand what I'm saying. Those two different attitudes are visibly noticeable too.

No, I got that part. I'm just wondering how does one distinguish a "stereotypical" black man from one who simply likes hip hop styles?


>> ^xxovercastxx:
>> ^longde:
I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.


I think you missed the part where Enzo said "stereotypical black man".

>> ^longde:

I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.
>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.



I think you missed the part where Enzo said "stereotypical black man".

I'm curious as to how you know these people's life stories, so much so that you are sure they've never achieved anything of which to be proud? Could it be that you are making a shallow judgment about theim based on their appearance and musical choices? I have to say that I find your blatant snap-prejudice more detestable than some alleged poser's stance.

>> ^Enzoblue:
>> ^longde:
Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.

>> ^longde:

Yeah, how dare those 's have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?
....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.


Having pride and holding your head high when you've done nothing to be proud of except perfecting the appearance of being an original gangsta or playa or whatever is detestable. That's what I'm saying. Self-esteem comes from within and can only be obtained by good deeds and caring and empathy. Self-image is a facade, (what you think other people think of you), and is easily faked.

Yeah, how dare those ******'s have some pride and hold their heads high. Why the nerve? Don't they know their place, dammit!?!?

....Obama's the worst one, I tells ya....>> ^Enzoblue:
I think what this guy is truly objecting to, (if he had the IQ to work it out in his head), is the black man's sense of entitlement which can be over-bearing in some. I read recently about the difference between self-esteem and self-image. Self-esteem coming from good deeds that make positive changes in your world, (that a stereotypical ghetto black man doesn't have), vs self-image that the stereotypical black man is over-flowing with.
You do see this boisterous in your face self-image a lot, just walking down the street with their heads held high, daring anyone to challenge them. The mistake, however, is to lump all blacks in this category and assume that all blacks with their heads held high are doing so to compensate for low self-image, which this guy is doing.