Edit Preferences
Logout
Dukedraven's Comments (507)
View Comments:
Sort:
1 - 25 of 507
I Slept With Tiger Woods
Commented Dec 19, 2009 at 18:35:17 in Comedy
“Don't nothin' surprise me no more.”
Save The New York Times: Bankrupt It
Commented Dec 19, 2009 at 16:41:19 in Media
“Good luck in getting people to pay for online subscriptions.”
Celebrating The Young Victoria
Commented Dec 17, 2009 at 19:20:51 in Living
“That sounds like a great story, Duchess. I ironically had that DVD reserved for later reviewing.”
Arianna Discusses Health Reform, State Of The Nation: 'The Lobbyists Are Winning'
Commented Dec 17, 2009 at 17:14:59 in Politics
“Arianna, you made Krista look so silly when you asked her if she liked the healthcare bill. She just defeated her own argument.”
Who Says Tough Guys Don't Cry?
Commented Dec 15, 2009 at 13:41:49 in Sports
“It's nice to see humility in a star athlete. I hope he retains it. God bless him.”
Can the Obama White House Course-Correct in Time to Avoid Hitting the 2010 Iceberg?
Commented Dec 14, 2009 at 20:52:39 in Politics
“In my mind, we have already hit the iceberg and the ship is listing and will finally sink next November.”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 19:47:08 in Media
“To "Blackrabbit" :
True, Kennedy was sort of hawkish when it came to fighting the Communists. He still received poor advice from the CIA, which informed him that a ragtag band of Cuban rebels was sufficient for overthrowing Castro. Kennedy acted upon this counsel and we all know what the Bay of Pigs. And as he escalated the war in Vietnam, Kennedy saw that America's commitment was growing and he may have taken us out of there had he lived long enough. That's why it was "unfortuna
True, Kennedy was sort of hawkish when it came to fighting the Communists. He still received poor advice from the CIA, which informed him that a ragtag band of Cuban rebels was sufficient for overthrowing Castro. Kennedy acted upon this counsel and we all know what the Bay of Pigs. And as he escalated the war in Vietnam, Kennedy saw that America's commitment was growing and he may have taken us out of there had he lived long enough. That's why it was "unfortuna
To an Athlete Screwing Up Young
Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 19:31:25 in Sports
“To "advocate4zpg" :
I was using hyperbole to make a point. Woods had an extremely wholesome, clean-cut image which has been irreparably damaged. His sporting career will live on.”
I was using hyperbole to make a point. Woods had an extremely wholesome, clean-cut image which has been irreparably damaged. His sporting career will live on.”
To an Athlete Screwing Up Young
Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 16:42:32 in Sports
“I would say Tiger will always have his professional golf career. America loves a winner and will continue to respect his athletic ability. His image of a being a demigod is permanently shattered. We'll always see him as a sinner than saint from now on.”
ADVOCATE4ZPG replied on Dec 12, 2009 at 17:09:03
“Exactly what portion of the Western population held Woods in such esteem? ......then many have seen films of people weeping at the death of Stalin in 1953......
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 15:34:01 in Media
“To "Dr.Robert
I agree that Kennedy was ill-advised on the Bay of Pigs debacle, but he was also unfortunately responsible for escalating the Vietnam War, which he started regretting before he died.”
I agree that Kennedy was ill-advised on the Bay of Pigs debacle, but he was also unfortunately responsible for escalating the Vietnam War, which he started regretting before he died.”
BlackRabbit replied on Dec 12, 2009 at 17:03:44
“'Il-advised"? "Unfortunately responsible"?
Kennedy was one of the most hawkish communist-bashing presidents since WWII. That may be a good or bad thing depending on your viewpoint, but let's not mince words.”
Kennedy was one of the most hawkish communist-bashing presidents since WWII. That may be a good or bad thing depending on your viewpoint, but let's not mince words.”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 12, 2009 at 03:57:39 in Media
“To "repearwo":
I agree that Obama is a thinker, but he's following the same wrong path that several other presidents have taken by listening to their military advisers. Like Tom Friedman said, much of the fighting in Afghanistan is due to their corrupt government, not Al Qaeda. More boots on the ground is not the answer.”
I agree that Obama is a thinker, but he's following the same wrong path that several other presidents have taken by listening to their military advisers. Like Tom Friedman said, much of the fighting in Afghanistan is due to their corrupt government, not Al Qaeda. More boots on the ground is not the answer.”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 20:26:06 in Media
“To "Elrancho2":
I'm sure Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Bush II had more military intelligence than the American people too, and it still didn't help them any. Just because a president gets a bunch of reports from generals and the CIA doesn't mean he'll make the correct decisions.”
I'm sure Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Bush II had more military intelligence than the American people too, and it still didn't help them any. Just because a president gets a bunch of reports from generals and the CIA doesn't mean he'll make the correct decisions.”
DrRoberts99 replied on Dec 12, 2009 at 12:43:27
“It pains me greatly to see the name "Kennedy" lumped in with those others. You are unaware of your own country's history Sir. JFK was tricked by the CIA into endorsing the event known today as the Bay of Pigs. When he realized what his intelligence service had done to him he fired Allen Dulles and proclaimed he would "smash the CIA into a thousand pieces" and scatter them to the wind. When the entire military and intelligence branches of his government, and most all of is cabinet as well, were making demands for air strikes and the invasion of Cuba during the Cuban Missile Crisis, JFK and his Brother resisted the war machine and resolved the Crisis peacefully, thus preventing a nuclear war. Kennedy had learned his lesson well. Unfortunately for him and our country, too well it seems.”
repearwo replied on Dec 12, 2009 at 01:06:02
“Of the four Presidents only Kennedy was a thinker. You left out one War President, Bill Clinton who was successful in the Balkins, who was also a thinker. Information does not much good unless you know how to process it and are skeptical of that information.
Obama is such a man.”
Obama is such a man.”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 13:58:11 in Media
“To "yweston":
I don't know how Joy Behar was challenging Arianna's opinion when she said it was "crazy" for Obama to get a peace prize when he's escalating the war.”
I don't know how Joy Behar was challenging Arianna's opinion when she said it was "crazy" for Obama to get a peace prize when he's escalating the war.”
yweston replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 14:57:36
“Joy also talked about supporting the President and Arianna responded with not being a cheerleader for the President. I've noticed this site is getting more and more critical and pushing conservative agendas. (i.e.) the story on how the Tea Party Movement started, and the story on Bank of America and of course more stories on Palin, etc. Arianna is pushing her personal agenda. Also this site pulls stories from different sources and they don't check any facts. They add sensational and often distorted headlines.”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 13:49:48 in Media
“To "Elrancho2":
On the issue of sending more troops to Afghanistan, you have to give Arianna credit. Obama is making a mistake and his actions make a mockery of the peace prize.”
On the issue of sending more troops to Afghanistan, you have to give Arianna credit. Obama is making a mistake and his actions make a mockery of the peace prize.”
Elrancho2 replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 19:52:49
“I honestly don't know. President Obama has far more information than either you, or I, or Arianna. He was elected to make these very difficult decisions.”
Elrancho2 replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 19:39:20
“The comment to which you're referring has been scrubbed. It seems we are not allowed to disagree with AH....?”
Elrancho2 replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 19:34:13
“I don't know. Obama has more information than me or you or Ms Huffington. What I can say is I have enormous respect for AH but my recent post on which you're commenting has been scrubbed. So it seems we're not allowed to disagree with AH. Now, that is not a good sign and it's disappointing. I wonder if this one will be scrubbed too?”
Arianna On The 'Supreme Irony' Of Obama's Nobel Speech (VIDEO)
Commented Dec 11, 2009 at 02:52:04 in Media
“Thank you, Arianna, for speaking the truth.”
Elrancho2 replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 05:45:55
“Arianna used to impress me with virtually everything she said. However, her recent turning against Obama seems less than logical and I think she's on a roll. I'm far more disappointed in her than in President Obama.”
Mollabaji replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 04:57:55
“a very tiny part of the "truth"! Obama talked about "just war" which is shocking. This term was first used by the Christian Crusaders (remember Bush?) and seems Ariana overlooks that fact and keeps quiet about it. So, we are at war against "infidels" who "threaten American people"? Who is boming civilians and killing the innocents? I wish also that Ariana would stop smiling while discussing serious issues. It looks sick.”
yweston replied on Dec 11, 2009 at 02:55:37
“As she see it. There are millions of voices out there. Just because you agree with her doesn't mean she's speaking the truth. Maybe Joy was speaking the truth with her challenges to Arianna's opinions and the other guest as well.”
Are You An "Alpha" Male?
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 16:02:29 in Living
“That's interesting, Tom. I never knew that we misinterpreted the interrelationships of the wolf pack. I believe Cesar Millan still teaches canine behavior using the alpha male and female model, so perhaps he hasn't yet recognized the new paradigm. It would be wonderful if we could apply this new understanding to our own human behavior. Something to think about.”
Does Death Exist? New Theory Says 'No'
Commented Dec 10, 2009 at 01:51:22 in Living
“Thank you, Dr. Lanza. I love when a scientist can explain quantum physics in terms that even a layman can understand. One day when we each cross over that veil, we'll know that we continue on forever. Peace and light always”
Icarus, Tiger and Chess: Behind the Scenes of Woods' Train Wreck
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 20:09:10 in Sports
“I agree, Robbie. Peace always”
hp blogger Robbie Vorhaus replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 22:03:37
“Hi, Dukedraven,
And I send you peace. Namaste.”
And I send you peace. Namaste.”
Icarus, Tiger and Chess: Behind the Scenes of Woods' Train Wreck
Commented Dec 09, 2009 at 12:02:32 in Sports
“Maybe Tiger is just locked up in a dark room in the fetal position, hoping it will all go away”
hp blogger Robbie Vorhaus replied on Dec 09, 2009 at 12:53:33
“Hi, Dukedraven,
You're right, and where ever he is, he's not having fun. All the best, rv”
You're right, and where ever he is, he's not having fun. All the best, rv”
The Perils Of Skepticism
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 21:20:36 in Living
“To "annikabillion":
There will always be traditionalists who see things from a classical point of view, until something comes along to upset the apple cart. That's why I'm glad we have physicists willing to venture out into the unknown with their scientific theories. Even Einstein was afraid of where the implications of quantum physics were leading.”
There will always be traditionalists who see things from a classical point of view, until something comes along to upset the apple cart. That's why I'm glad we have physicists willing to venture out into the unknown with their scientific theories. Even Einstein was afraid of where the implications of quantum physics were leading.”
The Perils Of Skepticism
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 10:31:34 in Living
“To "Annikabillion":
That's exactly what I'm doing. I'm taking the opposite position of "Ladyfractal" and saying the experiment can be applied beyond the sub-atomic particle level. There are plenty of physicists, including Fred Alan Wolf, Neils Bohn, Nobel Prize Winner Brian Josephson and Jack Sarfatti, who would accept the observer effect viewpoint. As I said before, there is a minority group of scientists who interpret the results of the wave particle experiment in a way that conflicts with the mainstream school of thought. Sometimes experts can reach different conclusions from the same test.”
That's exactly what I'm doing. I'm taking the opposite position of "Ladyfractal" and saying the experiment can be applied beyond the sub-atomic particle level. There are plenty of physicists, including Fred Alan Wolf, Neils Bohn, Nobel Prize Winner Brian Josephson and Jack Sarfatti, who would accept the observer effect viewpoint. As I said before, there is a minority group of scientists who interpret the results of the wave particle experiment in a way that conflicts with the mainstream school of thought. Sometimes experts can reach different conclusions from the same test.”
annikabillion replied on Dec 08, 2009 at 14:08:21
“I would just argue that that is wrong. While quantum mechanics may have some wonderful surprises in store which completely change the way we view the physical world, I don't think the observer effect is where it's at for the reason I already mentioned.
Also, just because some scientists may see it differently, will not prove to me that therefore your statement is true. Scientists are as susceptible as anyone else to making the mistake of retroactively fitting the evidence into what they want to be true. Of course experts can reach different conclusions from the same tests. But if one or two (or four) people interpret it in a scope that is far beyond the reaches of the experiment, though, it should be questioned.
Again, I want to reiterate that because this doesn't, in my opinion, prove the observer effect for our day-to-day lives, does not mean that I don't think the mainstream opinion could be overturned, or that quantum mechanics couldn't have mind-blowing implications for what it means to exist in the physical world. But I do think when you interpret it in a way not supported by the evidence, you actually limit the potential implications by not exploring where the evidence leads you.”
Also, just because some scientists may see it differently, will not prove to me that therefore your statement is true. Scientists are as susceptible as anyone else to making the mistake of retroactively fitting the evidence into what they want to be true. Of course experts can reach different conclusions from the same tests. But if one or two (or four) people interpret it in a scope that is far beyond the reaches of the experiment, though, it should be questioned.
Again, I want to reiterate that because this doesn't, in my opinion, prove the observer effect for our day-to-day lives, does not mean that I don't think the mainstream opinion could be overturned, or that quantum mechanics couldn't have mind-blowing implications for what it means to exist in the physical world. But I do think when you interpret it in a way not supported by the evidence, you actually limit the potential implications by not exploring where the evidence leads you.”
Sartre Meets Afghanistan: Obama's "No Exit" Strategy
Commented Dec 08, 2009 at 03:41:43 in World
“The sooner we get out, the better we'll be. This war is a meat-grinding moneypit.”
The Perils Of Skepticism
Commented Dec 04, 2009 at 20:16:11 in Living
“To "Ladyfractal':
Although these experiments pertained to sub-atomic particles, the implications are that it can be applied to our everyday lives. I firmly believe in miracles. I know many scientists are not prepared to make that leap, and that's okay. That's all the proof that some of us need.”
Although these experiments pertained to sub-atomic particles, the implications are that it can be applied to our everyday lives. I firmly believe in miracles. I know many scientists are not prepared to make that leap, and that's okay. That's all the proof that some of us need.”
annikabillion replied on Dec 08, 2009 at 05:08:13
“To Duke:
I've been reading your conversation with ladyfractal, and you completely ignored her logically sound rebuttle to your argument. What ladyfractal is saying is that BECAUSE those theories ONLY apply to the sub-atomic level, there can be no (or extremely limited) implications for matter on a larger scale. Matter is still controlled, primarily, by Newtonian mechanics at our human-sized scale, so any "miracles" will still have to follow these rules.
The main problem with your statement is when you imply that scientists should accept your interpretation. Because you firmly believe in miracles, you probably cannot be persuaded to believe otherwise. Is there any evidence you can imagine being presented to you that would change your mind? This attitude is what puts your argument outside the realm of science, which tries to prove itself wrong because this trial and error process leads to a richer knowledge of a subject. Therefore there is no proof that has convinced you; you came to this evidence with a preconceived notion of what you wanted to find.”
I've been reading your conversation with ladyfractal, and you completely ignored her logically sound rebuttle to your argument. What ladyfractal is saying is that BECAUSE those theories ONLY apply to the sub-atomic level, there can be no (or extremely limited) implications for matter on a larger scale. Matter is still controlled, primarily, by Newtonian mechanics at our human-sized scale, so any "miracles" will still have to follow these rules.
The main problem with your statement is when you imply that scientists should accept your interpretation. Because you firmly believe in miracles, you probably cannot be persuaded to believe otherwise. Is there any evidence you can imagine being presented to you that would change your mind? This attitude is what puts your argument outside the realm of science, which tries to prove itself wrong because this trial and error process leads to a richer knowledge of a subject. Therefore there is no proof that has convinced you; you came to this evidence with a preconceived notion of what you wanted to find.”
1 - 25 of 507
