Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - kidcoyote

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 237
1
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Today at 06:00 PM »
Wow. Why anyone would pay for a college which throws money away on BS like this. Good luck getting a job with this c*** taking up space in your head. Psst.....petroleum engineers start at $97k; feminist, environmental and ethnic studies work two jobs and live in their parents' basement's. I have a friend whose daughter, probably 24, is moving back to Vermont from NYC. Her environmental studies degree from UVM isn't landing her squat. She works mainly as a waitress. WTF even is an environmental studies degree? I mean, what do they do, complain about the climate, plundering our planet, polluting our water? Okay, and what job does that prepare them for? Junk like this is both robbery and child abuse.

Krugman to the Rescue

2
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Today at 05:53 PM »

Of course it was a puff piece, but communist posters in their kitchen? I assume those were real but the photographer/editor either wanted them or didn't notice. And why inflate their bookshelves? Of course it was staged, but the need to exaggerate their 'bookishness' is laughable. In short, it's trying to represent something they're not. More than likely, the woman hasn't read a book in 5 years. People that read a lot of books, or say they read a lot, don't need to misrepresent what's in their library. And if they read on a Kindle type device, they'd say that. The title of the piece nails it.

Until you have at least SOME evidence that she isn't reading the books that she claims to be, your ire is way misplaced.

She's reading 3 or 4 copies of the same book?


Let me spell it out for you, since your reading comprehension sucks.

The only claim SHE made was about the books on her nightstand.

The duplicate books were photo-shopped into a picture by some magazine staffer.  They have nothing to do with reality - and were never intended to (unless of course you believe that Shipman and Carney meant for the world to think they hold Sunday press conferences at home in their library with their kids asking questions). 

BTW - the clothes that they are wearing aren't really theirs either.   They are modeling attire for advertisers in the magazine.   Would you like to call them out for misrepresentation on that front too?   I'm sure you can find some wacko stance about why that's also evidence of what's all so wrong with "the left" too.

Mine sucks? You read what you want. Nice you got around to reading about the pile on the nightstand. Funny no comment on the Soviet posters, which are almost certainly real, as they're not highlighted. People who read a lot have no need to multiply their books. She's probably reading romance novels. Fantasyland, but then again, so is Obamacare, and you buy that BS. True believer in every sense.

3
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Yesterday at 11:01 PM »

Of course it was a puff piece, but communist posters in their kitchen? I assume those were real but the photographer/editor either wanted them or didn't notice. And why inflate their bookshelves? Of course it was staged, but the need to exaggerate their 'bookishness' is laughable. In short, it's trying to represent something they're not. More than likely, the woman hasn't read a book in 5 years. People that read a lot of books, or say they read a lot, don't need to misrepresent what's in their library. And if they read on a Kindle type device, they'd say that. The title of the piece nails it.


Until you have at least SOME evidence that she isn't reading the books that she claims to be, your ire is way misplaced.


She's reading 3 or 4 copies of the same book? With people like this, it's all image, no substance. Wealthy background, right schools, right pedigree, and full of s***. I guess these posters were so cool, they just had to have them. Like the idiots who wear Che Guevara tee shirts, unaware that he was Castro's executioner....though he was a boy scout compared to the Soviets. Do victims of socialist government oppression matter to the left?

Soviet Posters


4
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Yesterday at 10:46 PM »
Apparently, you can be a heartbeat away and brain dead at the same time. This is Joe Biden speaking in Boston, to survivors of the Boston Marathon bombing. Can't wait to see Lar spin this.

Brainless Idiot Joe Biden Tells Boston Bombing Survitors "It Was Worth It"

5
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: Yesterday at 09:40 AM »

I doubt it.  The much more likely scenario is that the lowly photoshop guy is charged with making sure the photos are artistically appealing, just like every other photo that gets into the mag.   It's got nothing to do with whether the subjects are "voracious readers" or not.

Maybe you should read the article first. Shades of kenpom wipeout. ;) Communist posters are a nice touch too, huh?

The next picture is the one that has been lampooned mercilessly. The Carneys are Democrats, so it goes without saying that they are well-read. (I always have a pile. I hate to be without books, Shipman says.) So they are photographed in front of a wall of books.

I read the article.  She's lists the books on her nightstand in a completely separate part of the article.   Big deal.  What does that have to do with whether or not there are a bunch of books behind them in an unrelated photograph?   It's a crappy photoshop job.  Nothing more. 

You know there's probably a pretty good chance that they all didn't just roll out of bed on a Sunday morning when that picture in the kitchen was taken too.  I bet that's staged too (or do you really think they eat all that food in the morning)   Big deal.

It's not like we're talking about fake war zone pictures or something.  It's a damn puff piece filler in a Washington magazine about women in DC.   You could probably dissect every other photo in the magazine and find evidence of photoshopping.   By the way, do you actually think the photo in question was meant to be from their house?  What was it, their morning press conference with their kids?   It's not meant to be real. 

It's funny.  It's not some big scandal like you're trying to make it out to be.

Of course it was a puff piece, but communist posters in their kitchen? I assume those were real but the photographer/editor either wanted them or didn't notice. And why inflate their bookshelves? Of course it was staged, but the need to exaggerate their 'bookishness' is laughable. In short, it's trying to represent something they're not. More than likely, the woman hasn't read a book in 5 years. People that read a lot of books, or say they read a lot, don't need to misrepresent what's in their library. And if they read on a Kindle type device, they'd say that. The title of the piece nails it.

6
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 14, 2014, 11:16 AM »

I doubt it.  The much more likely scenario is that the lowly photoshop guy is charged with making sure the photos are artistically appealing, just like every other photo that gets into the mag.   It's got nothing to do with whether the subjects are "voracious readers" or not.

Maybe you should read the article first. Shades of kenpom wipeout. ;) Communist posters are a nice touch too, huh?

The next picture is the one that has been lampooned mercilessly. The Carneys are Democrats, so it goes without saying that they are well-read. (I always have a pile. I hate to be without books, Shipman says.) So they are photographed in front of a wall of books.

7
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 14, 2014, 01:59 AM »
This is about the sloppiest photoshop I've ever seen. Are there any books at all? Is this what this party has become, phony images to misrepresent something? Why would a magazine do this, to make them look better read than they are? Phonies. What BS. Why would a magazine alter a picture? Doesn't this destroy their credibility?


Ideology vs Reality


But Lar, as usual you miss the point. This is their house. They've manufactured books to make it look like they're big readers. They'

Yup.  It's a lousy photoshop job.   But only you and your right wing whack jobs would try to turn it into evidence of some egregious campaign to deceive the American public.

It's one lowly magazine staffer doing a lousy job - nothing more.

BTW - I'm willing to bet that virtually every photo that appears in major magazines is photoshopped in some way.


Once again, you miss the point. Yes, the job is lousy, but the point is the misrepresentation. Obviously, they want the appearance to be tbat of voracious readers and their "real" bookshelf didn't accomplish that. Pssst....they're phonies. Even you should be able to see that, unless you have sone sort of bkockage.

8
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 13, 2014, 12:47 AM »
This is about the sloppiest photoshop I've ever seen. Are there any books at all? Is this what this party has become, phony images to misrepresent something? Why would a magazine do this, to make them look better read than they are? Phonies. What BS. Why would a magazine alter a picture? Doesn't this destroy their credibility?


Ideology vs Reality

9
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 12, 2014, 11:29 PM »
So this is what the BLM standoff was about. Harry Reid lining his own pockets. Big government in action. Self serving criminals.

http://www.infowars.com/feds-back-down-from-bundy-siege-after-infowars-expose-of-chinese-land-grab/

And these two? Talk about the 1%? Revolting. These two add zero to the economy. Rent seeking lobbyists. People complain about corporate money. At least corporations provide jobs and products that people, uncoerced, want to buy. These two creeps add nothing, but squeeze money for themselves, and raise the cost of products by their skimming by navigating the labyrinth of regulations which their friends put in. And big, big money. How could anyone in their right mind want more government? This is what you get.

Divorce Beltway Style

10
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 12, 2014, 10:53 AM »
For those who think national single payer healthcare is the solution, Vermont offers a primer on how this works. IMO, it's always sensible to see how a program like this would work on a smaller scale. Vermont estimates it will cost an additional $1.6 billion. With 620,000 residents, of which maybe 1/3 would be subsidized, makes this attempt laughable. Think about it, the 420,000 of those not subsidized might represent 150,000 families. So it'd cost those more than $10,000 each. In short, it ain't gonna happen. Vermont politics is stupid, but not suicidal.

All of this, whether state single payer, or national single payer rests on one ridiculous premise, that someone else will pay, but not me.

http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2014-04-11/vermont-s-single-payer-dream-is-taxpayer-nightmare

11
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 12, 2014, 09:47 AM »
Classic picture/caption to illustrate the national story:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/business_insider/2014/04/11/the_most_underrated_college_in_each_state_map.html

New York's is "College of Staten Island"? Never heard of it.

12
OT / Re: "Back the Bucs"
« on: April 11, 2014, 12:33 PM »
Maybe those guys blew out their arms pitching little league/legion/HS ball, etc.  and never made it to the show in the 1st place?   Maybe the only guys you saw in the majors were the ones who made it through all those innings without needing a surgery that wasn't available yet.


According to the expert  who says they have studied it, almost all of the major factors point to the out of control nature of youth sports today.  The "out of control" commentary is mine.
 
1. Year-round baseball
2. Playing in more than one league at the same time where rules don't count

Others:
In showcases for scouts, they try to overpitch and they get hurt
Poor mechanics continues to be a problem
Throwing breaking balls at an early age
"The radar gun is always a problem, too, because these kids are always trying to throw 90 miles per hour"
Minor injury in one's youth sets him up for a major injury when he's an adult
[/quote]

That may be it. My son did the showcase thing. Plus, played 50 legion games each summer, and about 20 HS games. The 50 legion games included tourneys, but that's where the damage comes in. Coaches use their best pitchers as much as possible. I forget the restrictions, but they're pretty bad for a kid's arm. It's something like 9 innings over 72 hours. So, you can pitch 6 on Sunday, 3 on Tuesday, then 6 on Wednesday. Pretty bad, though not sure my numbers are exact, but you can really wear a kid out. And the comps in regionals is pretty high level, so no easy outs.

13
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 11, 2014, 12:27 PM »
A decision I'm in 100% agreement with by the USDA. Now, I'm not sure how it would fair in a court of law but anything that is being done to get our children fitter is something I am all in favor for provided they are reasonable in implementation. This is very reasonable imo.

http://fox59.com/2014/04/10/hello-fruits-and-vegetables-junk-food-banned-from-schools-july-1/#axzz2yZgyYKmO


While I'm on board with a better school lunch, there's no fat in that diet. Low fat milk only? NFW. No nutrients. Fat is good for you, satisfies hunger. I lost 10% of my body weight, and my main place for dinner is a polish deli. Pork tenderloin, veal franks, meat loaf. Awesome. mjg turned me on to this kind of eating, with his recommendation of 10% milkfat Cabot yogurt. I add blackberry jam and pistachio nuts. The texture is between cream cheese and whipped cream. That 0% c*** is horrible, and loaded with sugar. Sans fat, you crave food all day. Feed kids pork, dark meat chicken, beef, butter, whole milk, eggs, cheese cake for dessert, and they'll be satisfied and won't be craving snack food between meals. Of course, have healthy portions of veggies and fruit, but cut down the carbs big time, and IMO, whole grains overrated.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/26/opinion/bittman-butter-is-back.html?_r=0

14
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 10, 2014, 12:14 PM »
Today's interesting stuff (and kid bait, no doubt):

http://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2014/04/heres-some-stunning-and-unexpected-good-news-about-obamacare

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science/health/what-can-we-do-about-junk-science-16674140

http://www.psmag.com/navigation/books-and-culture/half-americans-believe-least-one-conspiracy-theory-78613/


Can't open the 3rd one, but on the first two? Yeah, kid bait.

On junk science. As I'm not a scientist, I think the tipoff is when those who promote a certain view can't defend it against criticism. Calling people racists, tobacco deniers, getting editors of science journals fired for publishing opposing research, banning speakers, calling for jail, etc., enough of a sign that the science is indefensible. When German scientists published "100 Scientists Against Einstein", he replied, "I don't need 100 opinions, just one fact." This is how it should work. He was confident in his work. If you're not, you use smear tactics.

On ACA, no time to read, but I've seen charges of cherry picking. My view on healthcare is that of Milton Friedman's. It should be patient centered, not government centered. Until the first question you get asked upon entering a doctor's office goes from, "What insurance do you have"? to "What's wrong"?, I don't see much hope. In terms of actuarial science, charging young people more to pay for older/sicker people is indefensible. Young people pay more on car insurance due to actuarial stats, they should pay less on healthcare due to positive actuarial stats. The government has damaged education, housing and healthcare enough. Once again, I'll stick with Milton, "If the government ran the Sahara Desert, they'd run out of sand in 3 years." Venezuela, Argentina and Cuba are good examples of what happens when governments run things. The more government, the less overall wealth, the less freedom, the more ruin. Though not as extreme, Club Med(Portugal, Spain, Italy and Greece) and France not looking so hot either. So, yes, I'm for less government, not more. The ACA is more, so fundamentally against. Just no evidence that our government is capable in running things.

15
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 9, 2014, 10:06 PM »
Anyone know the author of this:

"Let me define the difference between economic power and political power: economic power is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value; political power is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction. The businessman's tool is values; the bureaucrat's tool is fear."

Which party's negative?

16
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 9, 2014, 06:34 PM »

Holy cow, you can kill a conversation before it even starts.  ?Communism, socialism, government coercion, blame games, old tricks?  Wow!  I just posted an article that I thought presented and interesting perspective on people understanding each other a little better and you come out firing shots across the bow.  Sorry I offended you.

Sorry, as your post was legit. It's just if I see one more cognitive study as to why people don't believe in AGW, think negative thoughts, etc., I think I'll pass out. IMO, there are issues in the world. Some people say red, others blue. But it's the merits of the positions which should be debated, discussed, argued, based on empiricism. Not questioning someone's mental ability, cognition, negative outlook. Whether it's the minimum wage, women's vs. men's wages, AGW, there are facts, empirical studies, etc. Seems to me that questioning someone's outlook is really admitting desperation. In the old West, you had charlatans selling hair tonic which would make hair grow(or so they said). It didn't matter what the seller thought, how he viewed things, nor his opponent's views. What mattered were the results. Did it work? Same with using leeches for cleansing blood. So, when I see these cognitive studies, it's a tipoff that those offering such have a weak argument, and can't defend with facts. I mention Communists, because this was what Marx did. And his successors have used propaganda to perpetuate a system which has been disastrous, all built on lies and no empirical studies to support its use as a system. When Marx was asked by the economists at the London School of Economics about how the system worked, as they didn't understand it, his reply was, "that's because you have a bourgeosie mind, and you need a proletariat mind to understand how it works." This is not an argument, nor facts. It's BS, lacking an argument. Is that not a similar cognitive argument to what Hibbings suggests? Did he not say, conservatives have a "negative mind"? Marx is suggesting "preconceptions" making one unable to think straight or logically.  This line of reasoning is dangerous and should be avoided. I don't see these cognitive studies as anything but the same as Marx tried. What is the difference?

17
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 9, 2014, 03:20 PM »
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/inquiring-minds-john-hibbing-physiology-ideology

"And when you combine Hibbing's research on the physiology of ideology with waves of other studies showing that liberals and conservatives appear to differ when it comes to genetics, hormones, moral emotions, personalities, and even brain structures, the case for politics being tied to biology seems pretty strong indeed."

Negativity bias? This is absurd. Isn't it the left which thinks everything is wrong and needs a government fix? Isn't that a negative outlook? How about the view that humans are the problem? Or that the world is going to end due to AGW? I'm not surprised they avert their gaze from horror. They do the same thing with places like Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina. People like Michael Moore, Sean Penn and Krugman think those places are great.


Well I suppose you just took Hibbing's "silly idea" that understanding why we make the choices we do might make us more tolerant of each other and shot all kinds of holes in it.   ;)  So much for increased tolerance and compromise.


I don't care why Communists did what they did and do. I care that they do it. I don't want to understand them. I want them stopped. Socialism is coercion. I want that stopped. Forcing people to buy government healthcare is coercion. I want it stopped. I don't care why, nor do I want to understand. I believe in freedom, and coercion isn't freedom. I don't see that as negative.

Buckley had it right re his new magazine 60 years ago. The left has no patience with those who disagree, and try to blame it on the thought processes of the "right brain", rather than look at their own disastrous policies, which are indefensible. It's an old trick.

It stands athwart history, yelling Stop, at a time when no one is inclined to do so, or to have much patience with those who so urge it.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/223549/our-mission-statement/william-f-buckley-jr

18
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 9, 2014, 07:53 AM »
http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/04/inquiring-minds-john-hibbing-physiology-ideology

"And when you combine Hibbing's research on the physiology of ideology with waves of other studies showing that liberals and conservatives appear to differ when it comes to genetics, hormones, moral emotions, personalities, and even brain structures, the case for politics being tied to biology seems pretty strong indeed."

Negativity bias? This is absurd. Isn't it the left which thinks everything is wrong and needs a government fix? Isn't that a negative outlook? How about the view that humans are the problem? Or that the world is going to end due to AGW? I'm not surprised they avert their gaze from horror. They do the same thing with places like Cuba, Venezuela, Argentina. People like Michael Moore, Sean Penn and Krugman think those places are great.

19
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 8, 2014, 11:01 PM »
Global Warming Panic explained

20
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 8, 2014, 08:55 PM »
First Wall Street, now Silicon Valley. Revolution in the air.

http://pjmedia.com/richardfernandez/2014/04/06/vanishing-point/

IMO, they have been ripped off by academia, and that's where their anger should be directed. Feminist studies and required reading like, Plundering the Planet, which I saw a student reading yesterday, will get you nowhere. You need to learn stuff other people want to pay you for.

Sorry for the awakening; sorry because they were sold a a sack of s***, and like a person who borrows 200 grand to acquire a degree in feminist studies find that it isnt worth a damn.


21
OT / Re: "Back the Bucs"
« on: April 8, 2014, 08:47 PM »
Good news, Buc's take 2 out of 3 from the Cards this past weekend.

Bad news........

Bucs prospect Taillon opts for Tommy John surgery

Also........

Pirates extend Hurdle, Huntington


This Tommy John surgery is epidemic. Wonder what they did in the prior years. Did guys just have sore arms and rested them or retired?


Something like 25% of MLB starting pitchers have had this surgery.


I heard 1/3. But what happened in the 50's-70's? Did guys just disappear, like they lost it? I just don't remember so many guys being disabled. I guess it happened, and they never came back. But many teams have lost so many pitchers. The Mets lost Hefner, Harvey and now Parnell, and I think this is common today. I just don't recall teams losing 3 pitchers in one year before, back 20-30 years. Maybe it happened, and they called it a sore arm. Did they just pitch after rest? Some guys have done that recently. Roy Halladay did that, rested.

22
OT / Re: "Back the Bucs"
« on: April 8, 2014, 05:30 PM »
Good news, Buc's take 2 out of 3 from the Cards this past weekend.

Bad news........

Bucs prospect Taillon opts for Tommy John surgery

Also........

Pirates extend Hurdle, Huntington


This Tommy John surgery is epidemic. Wonder what they did in the prior years. Did guys just have sore arms and rested them or retired?

23
OT / Re: Golf
« on: April 8, 2014, 05:27 PM »
Do you think Augusta would lock the gates to spectators if they had rain like Merion had last summer?  I'd bet yes.


Maybe if it rains too much, they will have a celebrity fishing trip.  Do you remember the Bush family fishing trip in New Orleans right after Hurricane Katrina ?!?!?




+1

24
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 8, 2014, 10:44 AM »
Two WSJ pieces today.

Re the first, yesterday, in waiting for the bus to NYC in Burlington, VT, I noticed a UVM student, reading a book, "The Plundered Planet", and shook my head. I didn't speak to him, but he looked African. Vermont has taken in a fair number of people from Chad and Sudan, as refugees. But I thought, is this what is going to get this guy ahead? Is this what will improve his knowledge to become a productive adult, to be able to support himself and a family, and contribute to society? Or is it just more capitalism bashing, tree hugging, earth in the balance BS, leading to a degree(hopefully) with no job prospects? Is Manhattan "plundered" real estate? If so, why do so many liberals and AGW supporters live there? Is this not a case of do as I say, not as I do?

How Global Warming Conquered the American Campus

url=http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303456104579487571151557790?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303456104579487571151557790.html]Shutup is No Argument[/url]

25
OT / Re: OT's GONE WILD!
« on: April 8, 2014, 10:21 AM »

Hmmm.  Just trying to help out, in this case anyway. There's so much junk on investing, to get the views of an investing titan is valuable. As nobody's commented, nobody's read it. I suppose it's not surprising.

Nobody commenting does not mean nobody read it.

True, in fact, but not likely. I see it as important, but maybe others don't.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 237