May 19, 2014 at 11:32:15
“As the stereotype image is still used(http://www.tomgrossmedia.com/img/arabcartoons07.jpg), it's hard to say "get over it". And while Macklemore may not have intended a Jewish stereotype, he needs some better explanation; I don't believe he's known for crazy disguises, so some explanation for the though process is going to be needed.”
simian sez on May 19, 2014 at 18:20:07
“Why do you think anyone owes you or me anyone, any explanation at all?
Isn't that a bit presumptuous?”
simian sez on May 19, 2014 at 18:17:51
“I politely replied to this...hardly my fault if it didn't pass muster with the thought police.”
“Honestly, I think they're getting a little ridiculous with the late hit penalties, and this is one of them. Looking at the GIF, it is very close to whether the defender touched Smith or Smith touched out of bounds first. And when it comes to forward progress, it's generally when they make contact with the ground, so to be consistent, he's not clearly out of bounds and untouchable until his foot is down. And in the end, not a hit, but a push. Really a BS call that is taking a lot of the defense out of the game, which I think is what they want since the customer finds a 41-38 game more exciting than a 13-10 game.”
hp blogger Brian Formo on Sep 9, 2013 at 14:20:22
“Also -- look how close Smith is to a first down, that's the reason for the shove. Truth is, if it's not the QB this doesn't decide the game. If a QB runs anywhere all them refs are gonna have they're hands on the hanky.”
“It's a play on "Empty Suit". Might be slightly clumsy in the translation, but frankly there would be outrage if the original expression was used since it didn't acknowledge her gender. A whole lot of nothing here, sad her campaign is trying to play it up, even sadder that HuffPo seems to be going for the bait.”
I do love all the people who declare with absolute certainty that they will never buy an Xbox One based on a rumor that comes out long before we really see what the device can or will do. Has a stand-by mode, so it can come "instantly on"? Has a camera? A microphone? Connected to the internet? Clear what you can do with that.
Then again, pretty much every cell phone and tablet... and heck, most computers today, can do the exact same thing. I'll wait until I get some actual information before declaring a boycott.”
4thWaldo on Jun 11, 2013 at 00:27:29
“It's not a rumor, it is a fact. You will not be able to disable the kinect and still use the console. It's always on, presumably so the voice recognition can turn the unit off and on, but if you believe that than I have a bride to sell you. Yeah, there is probably an LED showing that the camera is recording. Are comfortable with that being the only indication that you are being actively filmed in your own home? If you don't know that Big brother is watching by now than your head must be deep in the sand! There was even a case recently of high school administrators spying on students via the webcams on their laptops, but you don't think that your habits and your home are of interest to advertisers? The new kinect also works in the dark, has very precise facial recognition is precise enough to detect and monitor your heart rate. The implications are Orwellian, commercially and politically, but even more so in where they intersect, which, in the milieu that we are living in is also a complete overlap. You can walk though life with a blindfold on, but don't accuse anyone of rumor-mongering or hysteria when there are real implications in this technology and definite purpose in its design.”
“Technically, what he said is true even if the allegations are as well.
"I do not use crack cocaine [regularly, and that was months ago, so I'm not using it now], nor am I an addict of crack cocaine [for the same reasons]. As for a video, I cannot comment on a video that I have never seen [they may have taken it, but I never saw it], or does not exist. [it may exist, but if the first part is true, that I haven't seen it, then since I'm using the term 'or', the whole sentance is still true."”
Welshish on May 30, 2013 at 23:23:24
“That quote sounds like somebody who is under the influence.”
Apr 28, 2013 at 00:08:31
“From the transcipt:911 dispatcher:Are you following him? [2:24]Zimmerman:Yeah. [2:25]911 dispatcher:OK.We don’t need you to do that. [2:26]Zimmerman:OK. [2:28]
He still followed. It was his father's fiance's house, technically I was incorrect, but he had just as much right as anyone to be there. There was nothing about that situation that made it questionable for him to be there.And at night, in the rain, someone following you, watching you, but keeping a little bit of a distance isn't in any way suspicious? If someone did that to you, that wouldn't set off some sense of danger?Getting a snack and drink from a convenience store and walking to your dad's fiance's house is creating a situation? Oh, that's right, he was wearing a hoodie, very suspicious. Except for the fact it was raining. There is nothing reported about his behavior other than he seemed "suspicious" to a wanna-be cowboy that started any of this. ”
“It would be easy to see this as Perry deflecting criticism. The victims in this tragedy were certainly not the target of the pointed satire, it was Perry. The thing is, I don't think he believes he is deflecting. He thinks he's sincere. The lack of oversight, the lack of regulations, the few regulations that there were being violated but undetected because, if you can't eliminate a regulation, cut funding so they can't hold anyone to them... all of that led to the conditions that caused the explosion. And Perry has forever been a poster child for that situation, even touting it as a thing to be desired. His philosophy (and many others) led to the death of those people, but there is no way they can even see it. Any mention of what needs to be fixed is clearly a personal attack on them in their narcissistic minds.”
Apr 26, 2013 at 08:49:36
“This is absolutely a case of Stand Your Ground... but Zimmerman does not want to bring it up. You're in your neighborhood, you see suspcious activity, you see someone acting in a potentially threatening manner, you have a right to stand your ground, per the law. So, when Trayvon, in his father's neighborhood, sees a man trailing him, keeping a distance but seemingly watching him and following him, talking to someone on a cell phone... he absolutely had a right to defend himself. (and since we don't have Trayvon to talk to, we can only go by Zimmerman's account, which admits to such suspicious behavior). The suspicious behavior that started all of this was started by George Zimmerman, and when a 911 dispatcher told him not to follow, which would have ended the situation, he still did. He wanted to play cowboy, and he created this situation that ended up killing a young man.”
mdmcarauder805 on Apr 26, 2013 at 11:48:41
“(1) Zimmerman was never told by the dispatcher "not to follow" - you really need to get the facts straight.
(2) This was not Martin's father's neighborhood. Martin's father didn't live in that community. This is another example of you not knowing the facts of this situation.
(3)There was nothing for Martin to defend himself from - Zimmerman observing where the young man was going, was in no way a threat to Martin so what was there for Martin to defend himself from?
(40 This entire situation was created by Martin and his unjust assault of an innocent man.”
LetJusticePrevail on Apr 26, 2013 at 10:49:55
“Maybe Florida should just reword the statute to include a "lay on your back and defend yourself" clause. They could call it the "Zimmerman Law."”
SupremeVictory on Apr 26, 2013 at 10:47:28
GZ's behavior that evening was downright suspicious and creepy. We know what GZ was doing, but we don't know TM was doing that would make him suspicious enough to have an officer come out and interrogate him.
GZ was the suspicious person. Not TM.”
OverTaxedPayer on Apr 26, 2013 at 09:55:05
“True. This is common sense at it's best. I expect the peanut gallery to start posting it's rebuttal soon.”
“I want to protect Social Security... but dealing in such absolutes is ridiculous. If I cannot back someone saying "You can't call yourself a Republican and support tax increases", I cannot support the other side either. I'll take a close look and think on it... if the cuts are sensible, if they are pragmatic, if they are part of a deal rather than a one-way offer, then my support is certainly possible.”
TheGoToGayGuy on Apr 6, 2013 at 09:13:22
“I'm with you. Let's see what's he's offering before the baby gets thrown out with the bathwater!”
“Obama released his birth certificate, but since each birther didn't get an original in their hands to evaluate, they can't believe it; nor should we believe it just because some "news" organization says they saw it (did they also publish detailed, high resolution pictures as they did with the official Obama form)?
But that's moot. Let's say it is real. Doesn't prove anything. By most laws of the time, and in fact now, the husband of the woman giving birth is assumed to be the father. If Mrs. Trump had an affair with an orangutan, Mr. Trump would still be listed on the birth certificate.
Why is The Donald hiding the real evidence, and trying to distract us with such flimsy excuses?”
Dec 11, 2012 at 10:28:28
“It appears there were a lot of accusations on Twitter from run-of-the-mill fans that this was racist. The article appears to simply ask the question of whether or not it was, and judging from the comments, many don't think it was. I don't think there is anything wrong in asking the question.”
“Yep, Patriots are 3-3. Of course, the Seahawks would be, too, were it not for such an egregious call that it ended the referee strike because no one could bear another week of replacement refs. Stay classy, Sherman.”
“You are aware there are plenty of other teams other than the Yankees, and most readers are fans of some other team than the Yanks. Perhaps a little more NL coverage. And the fact is, just because the Yankees lose in extra innings, doesn't make it "heart breaking"... for many, it's a thrilling victory by the other team. Not saying don't cover the games, but perhaps write headlines from a more national perspective, rather than the NYPost cheerleader angle.”
dmac on Oct 15, 2012 at 14:15:46
“Amen. Granted, this is hardly a sports site, but didn't the Cardinals and Nats have rather an exciting game Friday Night? And I believe the NLCS started last night.
But there are 3 or 4 Yankees articles here. Yankees. Not Tigers. Just Yankees.”
“Similar thing happened to me at the Baltimore Zoo - I was croutching down getting a look at a mother with her baby towards the back. At first, didn't notice the teenage (equivalent) male at the top take a hop, swing into the side wall, and push himself at me... funny watching it happen on video, but really scared the crap out of me.”
“I'm looking for the following questions to be asked in one of these exchanges:
1. So you chose to be attracted to the opposite sex? When did you consider the same sex as a choice?
2. If it wasn't forbidden in the bible, you'd be open to a same sex relationship?
3. Since it is a choice, you could go off with one of these gentlemen (or ladies) in the room and have sex with them, correct?
Since they would give "choice" lipservice, but not allow any room for it to have actually been a choice for them, the point can be made that it isn't really a choice, and done out of their own mouths.”
Oh, wait, there is someone who would have gotten it, and now they won't. I'm sure they, too, have a compelling story, but we'll never know who it is or what their final outcome is. They'll just have to wait and hope a little longer.
The fact is, those rules are heavily debated and put in place to make the system fair to ALL patients. They are constantly revised and open for public comment. The judge really had no compelling reason to intervene, other than hearing the personal story. Politics has been injected into a system that works very hard to resist it, and now every criteria that has patients just short of qualifying is up for review by judges who don't know medicine, only know about the sympathetic person asking for an exception "just this one time".”
“For all those confused, here's a simple fact to keep in mind - the truth takes time. People get glimpses, people hear rumors, all these get reported. People speculate. If you take the position that the story being speculated on the moment this kid was arrested is THE story, then it sounds like the story keeps changing. But if you take it as a gist, that we've gotten some pieces of the story, some personal views that don't see the whole picture, then as more and more facts become clearer, as the rumors are disproved and the facts are confirmed, you get a clearer view of what happened, not a "completely different story", as conspiracy folk latch onto. It will be months before we get all the details we'll get in this case, you have to be open to take in each new piece of reporting, evaluate it, and put that piece into the greater puzzle.”
PatrickOMalley on Apr 25, 2013 at 02:31:15
“Add in the fact that the prosecution doesn't WANT the public to see and hear all of the final evidence, because if there is a video showing him putting THE bag with the bomb down, they will never be able to find 12 impartial jurors.”
“Of course Scalia relies on the "reduction to the absurd", because that's all he's got - to make an absurd comparison. If, by his reasoning, we're drawing a moral objection to murder, then we have to allow a moral objection to homosexuality, we also have to allow moral (and thus legal, as that's the gist of what he is saying) to interracial marriage. Heck, to being black or Mexican or any non-white. To a political philosophy. To owning guns. To saying something we don't like.
The thing he's ignoring is the reasoning behind the morality. The fact is, our basis for objecting to murder comes down to the fact that it is non-consentual - the person being killed is not agreeing to the act. The same goes for rape and kidnapping and robbery, etc... Most of our morality is based on the idea of consent. Homosexuality, between consenting adults, might be abhorrent to someone, but they are not forced to engage in the act. Whatever race you are, that is not based on consent.
In his rulings, and his writing, Scalia is showing that he is ruling by gut feeling, not by any actual thought about what lies behind the idea of freedoms in America.”
Nov 16, 2012 at 14:55:58
“I've seen other cases like this, and gone along with it, and they've held up to my testing. This case, however, I question - I know there is a shaded image of the cube showing the squares the same color. But when I block out all other squares but the two in question, I'm still seeing a notable difference, outside of context. Am I the only one?”
glennet on Nov 16, 2012 at 19:49:53
“You are correct. I zoomed them larger and used the holes in CD's to mask the other tiles.”
nomadseifer on Nov 16, 2012 at 18:06:48
“Other posters have mentioned it, but if you open up the image in Paint or any other software and isolate the two tiles (as the second image demonstrates) they are in fact the same. I tried 'blocking' it on the screen with my hands and they looked different to me, but they are in fact the same.”
GloriaAttarRNBSN on Nov 16, 2012 at 17:07:20
“No, I did the same thing, and they are not the same color.
Aug 18, 2011 at 11:05:35
“As a chef, I can say that I occasionally get a "portions are too big" complaint. And for every one of those, we get 10 that the portions are too small. We're not a country accostomed to moderation in anything, not just eating. Trying to run a business, trying to get positive word of mouth, trying to get returning customers, we'll listen to the 10 over the 1; there really isn't much choice otherwise.”
CapeJack on Aug 18, 2011 at 14:33:32
“So how do you respond to that one special person? "Thanks to people like you the animal shelter gets plenty of leftovers"?”