wow.such a narcissistic,self-absorbed twat pretending to be a human being.
a thin veneer of ineffectual platitudes dressed up as syrupy-sweet affectations.
just pure diabetic vomit.
a bile that regurgitates from the soulless and the totally sociopathic.
an attempt to deflower the empathic and compassionate.
the genuine and human..
in order to bask in her own putrid self-glorification.

Oh yea hey man.. we already covered this.

Albrite30 is "having fun"

it doesn't matter anything else other than that.

This waste of space retarded regurgitated bullshit since his last poll is just for him. So we have to bare with it.. you know, because he "has the power " although clearly shitting on the protocol, and lighting his methane infused shit on fire with his idiotic banter, Burning the protocol mandated in the FAQ.

At least one person got a laugh out of the idiocy.

anacondas can take a very long time to digest a meal. If they are disturbed by morons with a video camera, they sometimes regurgitate the prey item so that they can escape.
Funny looking capybara. I guess some of it's skin has been digested or something.

Laughing at the Rombots, still regurgitating bullet points and other foolishness. So sad, bitter, angry, and ignorant. Four more years of listening to them whine and parrot shit they saw on FOX.

An outside driver came into work last week, the day after the election, and told me about the Republican "stars" that are just waiting for a chance (Rubio and someone else). It says a lot about these nutters. All they need is some Cuban "star" (who lied about his family's reasons for coming here so he would look more pitiable(?) to Cubans in Florida, btw, but lying doesn't bother these idiots) to get some of the latino vote away from the Dems (apparently). He went on about Obama's offshore accounts and other nonsense and just got louder and more shrill with every jab I gave him. It was wonderful. When I suggested he change the channel once in a while, he started screaming (seriously) that he watched FOX (I didn't mention FOX) because it was the only station that gave both sides of an issue. LOL! He even used Alan Colmes as an example! LOL!

I'm telling you, their brains just don't work the same. It's like there is some latent Neanderthal gene at work or something, or, as Jeff Foxworthy once said, a family tree that doesn't fork.

Red states need more lions. Win for lions. Win for the world.

>> ^quantumushroom:

Why don't some enterprising socialists get together and start a company based on Wolff's premises? That would go a long way toward proving his business model works.
Would people shop at a Walmart-type store where every worker was paid a "living wage" and got full medical and other benefits, but the prices were 30% higher than at the actual Wal-mart?


in regards to your first question:
they have my friend.worker owned companies are on the rise and not only have they become highly productive they have also become highly profitable without losing benefits nor living wages.

i am not going to respond to your second point because it is just a vapid regurgitation of corporatist propaganda and ignores the fact that the american corporate charter needs to be revised due to its venal and destructive nature.

i could site many examples that your analogy is retarded but i feel it more prudent to have you do your own leg-work.
dont believe the hype brother but rather look into who is feeding you that hype.

Of course. That's what makes something nationally relevant. It doesn't even have to affect me. It just needs to impact more than some kid in New Mexico or something (I already don't remember). I'm just saying this isn't national news. There isn't some national epidemic of cops brutalizing 10 year olds.

There could be an epidemic of police brutality, and certainly of racial profiling. A human interest piece covering systemic coverups, dirty departments, anything that involved actual digging could be considered actual national news. In fact, many have been run by the "corporate media" on things like stop-and-frisk, terrorist profiling, and even things like corporate prison labor. I, like most lefties, am interested in well researched stories of that sort. This isn't that. It's some regurgitated local sob story. Typically their fact checking is bullshit to boot.

In other words they amplify noise and partisan rhetoric rather than inform. The Economist or the Times they are not. It's usually fine that they do what they do, it's just that you shouldn't confuse it for something that it isn't, like news.

>> ^scheherazade:

That really speaks to the general state of selfish humanity.
If it isn't affecting me, then I don't care.
People not affected by the economic downturn, don't care about the recession.
People not affected by psycho police, don't care about police brutality.
Enough people are affected by the economy for there to be a lot that want to hear about it in the news.
Only some people are sacrificed to the police gods, so only some care to hear about that in the news.
(Although with 1% of our population in jail, and 1 in 30 in jail or on parole, 1 in 9 black males ages 20 to 34 in jail, it's not that small of an amount... and it's particularly sinister when these people are shoved into private jails that charge the public to hold the prisoners, and then charge the prisoners for their stay [as if it's a hotel], and use the prisoners for cheap labor that they sell to companies that don't want to hire people for livable wages, with solitary if you don't work for them. - on top of most people in jail being guilty of "crimes" that involved no one but themselves and have no harm.)
Ultimately, when it's you that's out of a job, the economy matters a lot.
And when it's you getting tazed, beat up, and charged with assault (oh the irony), then police brutality matters a lot.
The sentiment of "don't waste my time with your sob stories, we've got real problems (that affect me)", really goes all ways.
You could just as well read : "Who cares about your economy, when the government is taking my health and putting me away for no more than the entertainment/venting of a public employee".
-scheherazade

People with power can do anything, especially if it involves tricking the American people. That's like the easiest thing in the book, especially when none of them really think for themselves so much as regurgitate concepts that humans have not discovered the long term consequences of. Corporations are people. Cool, says flesh and blood people, now invalidated but believing the system is working as intended.

>> ^lantern53:

All of the details are in her books.


so it should be easy for her to regurgitate them on command...she wrote the book after all right? she wouldn't dare put anything in there that wasn't fully researched and subject to peer review right??

cept she doesn't...ever. she literally does the exact opposite of what she declares early in the interview. Libs call people names, Conservatives make arguments. Unfortunately Coulter was the only one slinging derogatory names around. The only arguments I heard were from Ms. Couric.

funny that.

@yellowc I think we're on the same track really. I do think a case of comparing devices based purely on specs is a bit infantile. But it's something that Apple invites with their hyperbolic presentations and marketing. If they didn't describe every part of their devices as 'Revolutionary' or 'Unsurpassed' or 'Magic', then there'd be no need to pick them apart. Google didn't do that with the Nexus 7, they went with the 'experience' angle, and from what I've heard it hits those marks (as you've said too). AND it's stupendously cheap. It almost made me want a tablet (I really see little use in tablets for tablet's sake... which is why the Surface excites me, it's a tablet and a laptop without lugging around a keyboard/mouse as a separate thing... but I digress).

Yes, I think we both agree that Apple do something just 'right' that hits a chord with so many people.

What gets me more than anything is their horrendously self important marketing (it started with the Mac vs PC pushing untruths about how Macs never crashed and Windows PCs always did), and how people just believe it to be true, how I hear people mindlessly regurgitating the Apple marketing spiel about how iDevice X has the best Y ever... and how Apple invented feature Q.

I don't think anyone can deny that Apple created this smartphone world we live in, the iPhone was a landmark device, but that doesn't mean that everything they do is the best.

>> ^Fletch:

Cherry-picking history and regurgitating logical fallacies seem to be all you Repugs have in your arsenal nowadays. It's pitiful.

We can always count on the gop-bots to bring the stoopid.
Your argument is so much stronger without this foamy cruft.



You're certainly aware of how effective this is at painting the rest of your argument as the same kind of "us-vs-them" garbage (regardless of its merits) so it comes across as so much chest-puffing and strutting about. That is to say, when you argue like this, you're obviously not arguing for effect - you're showing off for your friends.

>> ^lantern53:

White men are the most maligned people on the planet. We make laws here protecting women from domestic abuse, providing health care and free breakfasts for their kids, etc. yet because this man is not a woman, he is some kind of shit to be abused.
By your logic, since he is a man, he must be thinking that woman are property to be utilized in any way with no regard for their well-being.
Your logic is porked.


Sorry, but that's just fucking sad.

This particular dipshit (I didn't see any other white men being interviewed) didn't pass the protections you mentioned all by himself (if he had anything to do with them at all). For all you know, he fought tooth and nail against them. By your "logic" this idiot shouldn't be criticised because those protections exist at all.

What in this video made you believe he has ANY regard for the well-being of women, outside of allowing an abortion to save her life? Or are you just running to his defense because he has an "R" next to his name?

About 30% of the world population is white. Do you think only white men had anything to do with laws that protect women? By your logic, those white men were ALSO solely responsible for the housing market collapse, 3 unneccesary wars, the world-wide recession, and all the financial scandals that seem to be exposed on a daily basis. They could use a little maligning. Cherry-picking history and regurgitating logical fallacies seem to be all you Repugs have in your arsenal nowadays. It's pitiful.

The whole point of the video is that this crusader against abortion hasn't even considered the view of those who would be most affected by anti-abortion laws. Why do you think that is? Money from anti-abortion donors? Religious nuttery? Towing the party line? Incapable of empathy (a sociopath)? That he is a man who wants to pass laws that only affect women makes it even more disgraceful.

We can always count on the gop-bots to bring the stoopid.

I wish I'd spent more time indulging in the communal regurgitation of Reddit content just so I could *doublepromote this.

I really don't understand why you bother. Shiny has proven time and time again that he's either incapable of understanding anything outside of his magic book, or he's nothing but a troll. I vote for the second, but the net effect is the same. You're wasting your time.>> ^ChaosEngine:

>> ^shinyblurry:
"Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it."
Steven Pinker,
Professor of Psychology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA., "How the Mind Works," [1997]
You love this quote, don't you? I searched for it on google and fuck me if the first page or two isn't almost all you regurgitating this at every opportunity.
Now, here's the thing. You haven't read this book. Because if you had, you would have seen the next line.
"Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it. Thankfully, the evidence is overwhelming. I don't just mean evidence that life evolved (which is way beyond reasonable doubt, creationists notwithstanding), but that it evolved by natural selection."
But hey, let's ignore that bit. Let's live in shinys fantasy delusional that there isn't an almost overwhelming preponderance of data backing up evolution. Pinker would still be right. Why? Because there are no valid competing scientific theories. Literally. That's it. It's the only game in town. No-one has come even remotely close to explaining the diversity of life on this planet without evolution.
Intelligent design is not a theory. It fails almost every criteria.
So seriously, enough with the bullshit.

>> ^shinyblurry:

"Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it."
Steven Pinker,
Professor of Psychology, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, USA., "How the Mind Works," [1997]

You love this quote, don't you? I searched for it on google and fuck me if the first page or two isn't almost all you regurgitating this at every opportunity.

Now, here's the thing. You haven't read this book. Because if you had, you would have seen the next line.

"Because there are no alternatives, we would almost have to accept natural selection as the explanation of life on this planet even if there were no evidence for it. Thankfully, the evidence is overwhelming. I don't just mean evidence that life evolved (which is way beyond reasonable doubt, creationists notwithstanding), but that it evolved by natural selection."

But hey, let's ignore that bit. Let's live in shinys fantasy delusional that there isn't an almost overwhelming preponderance of data backing up evolution. Pinker would still be right. Why? Because there are no valid competing scientific theories. Literally. That's it. It's the only game in town. No-one has come even remotely close to explaining the diversity of life on this planet without evolution.

Intelligent design is not a theory. It fails almost every criteria.

So seriously, enough with the bullshit.

So tell me then SB, what is wrong with healthcare? Lets begin our conversation.

>> ^shinyblurry:

So in other words, strawman arguments and ad hominem attacks are your idea of an intelligent conversation. Bravo.
>> ^shagen454:
Do you ever listen to yourself? Do you think Jesus would condemn healthcare? Oh, right. If you believe in Christ all will be fine and dandy. Buzz off with your ignorance.
Do you know anything about the world that is not regurgitated bullshit from the most corrupt media in the world? I doubt. Go play outside.