Natey 1's Comments
I'd never heard of Victor Mature before this, but he sounds like a character. I'll have to try and his acting "muscles" on Netflix.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Yeah, juuust keep using up that helium. We probably have infinite amounts of it forever, right?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Happy to oblige!
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Ted
You're absolutely right. There are and always will be kooks on both sides, but that in no way implies that the sides are equal, or that they deserve criticism equally.
Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, etc. used to be far, far right. "Shock jocks," if you will. Now they are actually a fair representation of the right's ideological platform (not the electorate - the platform). Why would this article criticize left-wingers when equal rights movements typically arise from the left? The political right has become such a caricature that it's about as laughable as the picture in this article (which you don't seem to find offensive?).
Who is the left-wing Sarah Palin? Who is the left-wing Limbaugh? Michele Bachmann? Rand Paul? Rick Perry? These are not off-the-wall "rogue" characters. These are people who can earnestly claim that man walked with dinosaurs at the time of earth's creation 6,000 years ago, that God won't let us run out of oil, etc.... and still have the full, unapologetic backing of their party.
THAT'S the difference. If one side of the aisle has more visible kooks, it will draw more criticism. Plain and simple.
You're absolutely right. There are and always will be kooks on both sides, but that in no way implies that the sides are equal, or that they deserve criticism equally.
Rush Limbaugh, Bill O'Reilly, Glenn Beck, etc. used to be far, far right. "Shock jocks," if you will. Now they are actually a fair representation of the right's ideological platform (not the electorate - the platform). Why would this article criticize left-wingers when equal rights movements typically arise from the left? The political right has become such a caricature that it's about as laughable as the picture in this article (which you don't seem to find offensive?).
Who is the left-wing Sarah Palin? Who is the left-wing Limbaugh? Michele Bachmann? Rand Paul? Rick Perry? These are not off-the-wall "rogue" characters. These are people who can earnestly claim that man walked with dinosaurs at the time of earth's creation 6,000 years ago, that God won't let us run out of oil, etc.... and still have the full, unapologetic backing of their party.
THAT'S the difference. If one side of the aisle has more visible kooks, it will draw more criticism. Plain and simple.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
What he said is "I love the women's movement — especially when walking behind it."
Please tell me you were being ironic and just forgot to post the punch line.
Please tell me you were being ironic and just forgot to post the punch line.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
This is actually a video recording of a Star Talk podcast from months and months ago. I wonder if they're going to be releasing any new video podcasts or just the "live" Star Talk podcasts Neil has done every now and then over the past few years.
Either way, I'll probably watch. I'm a fan of both Nerdist and Neil Tyson.
Either way, I'll probably watch. I'm a fan of both Nerdist and Neil Tyson.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
On the contrary, the purpose of the "first world problems" internet gag is to convey exactly this message; first world problems are not problems. Regardless, this video makes a striking contrast.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Part 2:
"Whatever, man... it's just a copy"
*Writes on the readable side of the CD*
"Whatever, man... it's just a copy"
*Writes on the readable side of the CD*
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Translation: "The super wealthy have rigged US tax/monetary policy for their own benefit, and for the detriment of everyone else. Guess there's nothing we can do about it! Better just lie down and accept it."
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
The current fiscal crisis is a crisis of demand. Large corporations have more cash on-hand than ever before...so why haven't they been hiring? That's right: NO DEMAND. That is the most basic fact one needs to understand about our current economic situation. Trickle-down economics is a joke, and only the uninformed still tout its merits.
How, exactly, has Socialism has been proven ineffective? Are you perhaps ignoring the fact that the most prosperous (per capita), most well-educated, and healthiest countries on earth (moreso than the US in all respects) sway heavily towards socialist policies?
And, please, your examples are terrible. Not every company will invent a product that completely changes the way the world operates. In fact, the overwhelming majority won't. Also, apple didn't create a demand for music delivery devices; the demand was already there. Nor did they create the first mp3 player. All they did was grab a majority of a pre-existing demand.
How, exactly, has Socialism has been proven ineffective? Are you perhaps ignoring the fact that the most prosperous (per capita), most well-educated, and healthiest countries on earth (moreso than the US in all respects) sway heavily towards socialist policies?
And, please, your examples are terrible. Not every company will invent a product that completely changes the way the world operates. In fact, the overwhelming majority won't. Also, apple didn't create a demand for music delivery devices; the demand was already there. Nor did they create the first mp3 player. All they did was grab a majority of a pre-existing demand.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Charles
I agree that wealth can be created, but that doesn't begin to describe or address the reality of America's wealth gap.
And let's not bring up trickle-down "job creator" economics, which has been proven thoroughly ineffective time and again.
Yes, it is very important for small businesses to have easy access to capital. But businesses in and of themselves don't create jobs. Demand creates jobs. Specifically, consumer demand. The very same consumers who possess a dwindling amount of the nation's total wealth.
I agree that wealth can be created, but that doesn't begin to describe or address the reality of America's wealth gap.
And let's not bring up trickle-down "job creator" economics, which has been proven thoroughly ineffective time and again.
Yes, it is very important for small businesses to have easy access to capital. But businesses in and of themselves don't create jobs. Demand creates jobs. Specifically, consumer demand. The very same consumers who possess a dwindling amount of the nation's total wealth.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
I'm amazed how so many of you can dismiss social/economic inequality with such a simple phrase as "life isn't fair."
Well guess what, "life" didn't create the class disparities we see today. The nation's wealthiest lobbying to rig the system in their own favor is what did it. A system designed to divert more and more of the nation's aggregate wealth to the top few percent of citizens is hardly something that should be tolerated. Why would you even defend that kind of system?
It's not about hard work vs. laziness. It is about people setting themselves up to be fundamentally more advantaged from the start, and setting up others to be fundamentally more disadvantaged.
Well guess what, "life" didn't create the class disparities we see today. The nation's wealthiest lobbying to rig the system in their own favor is what did it. A system designed to divert more and more of the nation's aggregate wealth to the top few percent of citizens is hardly something that should be tolerated. Why would you even defend that kind of system?
It's not about hard work vs. laziness. It is about people setting themselves up to be fundamentally more advantaged from the start, and setting up others to be fundamentally more disadvantaged.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Dan Pangburn
Do you actually know what the first law of thermodynamics is? I'm curious to see how you think it applies to your argument.
And how, exactly, have I been fooled by politics? I don't pay attention to Al Gore. I pay attention to the consensus of experimentation and observation, which unswervingly points to Anthropogenic Global Warming. I have the entire body of scientific evidence to back up my opinion. How about you?
Do you actually know what the first law of thermodynamics is? I'm curious to see how you think it applies to your argument.
And how, exactly, have I been fooled by politics? I don't pay attention to Al Gore. I pay attention to the consensus of experimentation and observation, which unswervingly points to Anthropogenic Global Warming. I have the entire body of scientific evidence to back up my opinion. How about you?
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
@Dan Pangburn
You'll pardon me if I don't take your word for it over the National Academies of Science of every major industrialized country and 97%-98% of actively publishing climate scientists (A.K.A. experts).
It is your prerogative if you wish to maintain a fundamental distrust of the scientific method, but you should know that it doesn't exactly help your credibility. Denialism usually boils down to irrational conspiracy theories anyway.
You'll pardon me if I don't take your word for it over the National Academies of Science of every major industrialized country and 97%-98% of actively publishing climate scientists (A.K.A. experts).
It is your prerogative if you wish to maintain a fundamental distrust of the scientific method, but you should know that it doesn't exactly help your credibility. Denialism usually boils down to irrational conspiracy theories anyway.
Abusive comment hidden.
(Show it anyway.)
Just kidding this is amazing.