71 (edited by sbsurfer 08.26.09 15:09)

Re: Politics

from what i gathered those articles support the notion that blue eyed people see better at night than they do in lighter settings, given the lack of pigmentation in the iris. no where does it say that blue eyed people can see better in the dark than brown eyed.

nothing you can say will change the way i feel, so don't waste your time retorting to what i jus said. this is the new politics thread, start a new thread on why blue eyed people see better at night than dark eyed people or why asians are innately better at math than all other "races" if you feel so strongly about it.

72 (edited by ReturnOfH 08.26.09 15:14)

Re: Politics

All those articles said is that blue eyed people are more sensitive to light. I don't know where you got that blue eyed people "see better at night than they do in lighter settings" notion. Well, it makes sense to me that since blue eyed people are more sensitive to light, meaning, they take in more of the sparse nighttime light. The fact that it's such a common genetic trait (in animals and humans) in areas of the world that get less sunlight points very strongly towards that conclusion.

Heh, you're the one that brought it up. Why would you not rethink your viewpoint in light (har) of new evidence?

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

73 (edited by ReturnOfH 08.26.09 15:22)

Re: Politics

sbsurfer wrote:

on why blue eyed people see better at night than dark eyed people or why asians are innately better at math than all other "races" if you feel so strongly about it.

The two arguments are completely unrelated. One has a solid biological basis that has been studied and confirmed, the other is just unfounded (slightly racist) speculation. You're making ridiculous arguments again, namely making a faulty comparison.

and this:
http://www.freewebs.com/thinkingstraigh … %20Extreme

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

74 (edited by sbsurfer 08.26.09 15:27)

Re: Politics

what i meant to say is that the articles said blue eyed people have a hard time seeing in lighter settings, but i don't know how that means they see better at night than brown eyed people like you seem to believe. i'm not the one who said night surfing is easier for me because i have blue eyes, that was you bud. i took the time to rethink my viewpoint given the new evidence you presented, and all i could draw from it was that blue eyed people are more apt to suffer from photophobia, not that they see better at night than brown eyed people. and even if blue eyed folks had superior night vision than brown eyed people, it would be so minute it wouldn't be worth mentioning. heh, that's what you said, not me.

the reason i brought it up was to convey the point that you were one to talk. i've said some stupid shit in the past but i have acknowledged that and moved forward. i think what you said was stupid and there exists no solid evidence to support your claims, just arguments which use inductive reasoning and provide no clear answers on the area of which eye color has superior eye vision. defensive much? just yanking your chain bud, get over it, i am.

75

Re: Politics

...and thanks for the fallacy tutorial. no need for it though, i value the words of my university professors more than some self-professed philosopher/psychologist who used to try and self-diagnose danny b with mental disorders some years back.

76 (edited by ReturnOfH 08.26.09 16:22)

Re: Politics

You can't self-diagnose someone else's mental disorder haha. (not that I'm implying he has one <3) You really have no business speaking about that anyway, you don't really know what that was a response to.

I'm sorry you aren't able to connect the dots on the eye color argument. It's widely shown throughout nature that animals that take in more light through their eyes through some adaptation have an improved ability to see at night, I can find references for you if you like. The eye color obviously makes enough difference that many blue eyed people suffer from a condition specific to them due to increased intake of light. I don't see why you assume for some magical reason you've yet to explain that blue eyes don't also take in more light at nighttime.

Oh, and what's with the "that's what you said, not me." comment, I don't remember ever saying that.

More evidence that you will choose to ignore:

But does your eye colour influence how you see?

It turns out that it does. The darker the eyes, the more light is absorbed as light waves pass through the eye, and the less light is available to reflect within the eye.

http://eccentricscientist.wordpress.com … than-blue/

Yes, he does talk about glare from headlights being worse for those with blue eyes, but that isn't a problem when you're surfing. The evidence is clear, more light is available to reflect in blue eyes, period. Thus an increase in night vision, barring factors such as headlights.

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

77

Re: Politics

you did claim that danny was suffering from a vast array of mental disorders by attempting to link danny's comments to patterns of behavior exhibited by sufferer's of bi-polar disorder and manic depression, just like you said you surf better at night because you have blue eyes, not me pal.

i have better things to do than to dig up two year old 805bbr mssage board discussion arguments but you and i both know you typed the aforementioned.

if you don't want me commenting on the situation at hand (danny vs. you) then don't fucking bring your overly dramatic bullshit onto this messageboard. it's public so you made it my business and the business of everyone else when you posted it on a public internet forum.

your over-zealous holier than thou attitude is fucking over the top. you asked a stupid question in session reports, and wondered why everyone insulted you. man up to your shit and get over it.

78 (edited by ReturnOfH 08.26.09 16:38)

Re: Politics

What you don't understand is that feud began off the message board. So no, you don't know the whole story. You also remember wrong, I linked his behavior with narcissistic personality disorder, not bipolar or depression. Dick move, but so was the shit (not on the message board) he said to me. We're both over it.

As far as me coming across holier than thou, I'm just trying to further an argument. You keep diverting away from it with ad hominem attacks. I'm not trying to say I'm a better person than you, I'm not addressing your worth as a person. I did bring back that post where you mistook the onion parody for a real conspiracy, because I stumbled upon it and thought it was funny. I'm sorry that angered you so much that you decided to enter into an argument about a comment I made awhile back regarding eye color and night vision. I honestly would like to cast the personal shit aside and just talk about that, you might be able to prove me wrong but so far just choose to attack me. Have a good day.

p.s. If my attitude is "holier than thou" what's yours, "asshole?"

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

Re: Politics

For what its worth, I've said countless retarded things on this forum, I acknowledge that. I just think you chose a poor example because I've presented extensive evidence that supports it being likely.

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

Re: Politics

haha you guys are funny. a whole page on the new and improved politics thread dedicated to eye color.

i actually deleted the old thread to keep from being tempted from spending a good amount of my time looking at it, wasting time arguing, and my point nor anyone else's point ever actually changing any ones mind. Plus, I am super busy at work selling houses and me and Juan are starting to work on editing our next video so I wanted to stay focused but god dammit thanks you fuckers for remaking this thread again proving I am weak.

Re: Politics

What, did you think people were only going to discuss politics on a thread you posted? You unleashed the beast, you have no control over it, and your creation has come back to consume you.

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

Re: Politics

the wisdom of brian h never ceases to amaze me. thanks for your kinds words fine sir

83 (edited by adamwarmington 08.27.09 11:27)

Re: Politics

great!!

"37 companies have dropped sponsorship of Glenn Beck's Fox Show, following a remarkably successful Color of Change campaign launched in response to Beck's crazy racebating."

listening to its conscience hasn't worked thus far, so maybe now fox news will start making decisions on whats best for it's, the right's, and capitalism's punk bitch daddy, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

hahaha, epic
fucking dorks

Re: Politics

adamwarmington wrote:

great!!

"37 companies have dropped sponsorship of Glenn Beck's Fox Show, following a remarkably successful Color of Change campaign launched in response to Beck's crazy racebating."

listening to its conscience hasn't worked thus far, so maybe now fox news will start making decisions on whats best for it's, the right's, and capitalism's punk bitch daddy, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

hahaha, epic
fucking dorks

So any other so-called media person can say whatever they want, but because this guy is on Fox News, and said he thinks the President is racist, you're happy his sponsors are dropping and think he should get kicked off the air? What happened to freedom of speech?

How may people in the media in the last 8 years have said horrible things about George Bush while he was President and no one called for any action. Oh, the double standards.

85

Re: Politics

there is a difference between news and slander/propoganda

Re: Politics

adamwarmington wrote:

there is a difference between news and slander/propoganda

True, there is, but please explain why ABC refuses to air a commercial against Obama's healthcare plan but willingly let Obama have a full day of coverage to push the agenda.
-

The refusal by ABC and NBC to run a national ad critical of President Obama's health care reform plan is raising questions from the group behind the spot -- particularly in light of ABC's health care special aired in prime time last June and hosted at the White House.

The 33-second ad by the League of American Voters, which features a neurosurgeon who warns that a government-run health care system will lead to the rationing of procedures and medicine, began airing two weeks ago on local affiliates of ABC, NBC, FOX and CBS. On a national level, however, ABC and NBC have refused to run the spot in its present form.

"It's a powerful ad," said Bob Adams, executive director of the League of American Voters, a national nonprofit group with 15,000 members who advocate individual liberty and government accountability. "It tells the truth and it really highlights one of the biggest vulnerabilities and problems with this proposed legislation, which is it rations health care and disproportionately will decimate the quality of health care for seniors."

Adams said the advertisement is running on local network affiliates in states like Louisiana, Arkansas, Maine and Pennsylvania. But although CBS has approved the ad for national distribution and talks are ongoing with FOX, NBC has questioned some of the ad's facts while ABC has labeled it "partisan."

"The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue," spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. "Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News."

NBC, meanwhile, said it has not turned down the ad and will reconsider it with some revisions.

"We have not rejected the ad," spokeswoman Liz Fischer told FOXNews.com. "We have communicated with the media agency about some factual claims that require additional substantiation. As always, we are happy to reconsider the ad once these issues are addressed."

Adams objects to ABC's assertion that his group's position is partisan.

"It's a position that we would argue a vast majority of Americans stand behind," he said. "Obviously, it's a message that ABC and the Obama administration haven't received yet."

Dick Morris, a FOX News political analyst and the League of American Voters' chief strategist, conceptualized the advertisement and said its purpose was to "refocus" the debate on health care reform.

"I feel the whole debate on health care reform needed to be refocused on the issue of Medicare," he told FOXNews.com. "Most of the debate had been on issues of socialized medicine and cost. I felt that the impact of the legislation in cutting the Medicare program and enforcing rationing needed to be addressed."

Morris, a onetime advisor to former President Bill Clinton, said he was particularly troubled by ABC's decision not to air the spot.

"It's the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform," he said. "For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue."

Re: Politics

ryanthompson wrote:

What happened to freedom of speech?

This is not a freedom of speech issue. He can still spout off racebaiting bullshit on the street, with the rest of the crazies. He's just might not be getting paid for it much longer since most of his sponsors don't want to be associated with his show any longer. That's just freedom at work, you're not suggesting that they're forced to support his show no matter what he says are you?

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

88

Re: Politics

ryanthompson wrote:
adamwarmington wrote:

great!!

"37 companies have dropped sponsorship of Glenn Beck's Fox Show, following a remarkably successful Color of Change campaign launched in response to Beck's crazy racebating."

listening to its conscience hasn't worked thus far, so maybe now fox news will start making decisions on whats best for it's, the right's, and capitalism's punk bitch daddy, $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

hahaha, epic
fucking dorks

So any other so-called media person can say whatever they want, but because this guy is on Fox News, and said he thinks the President is racist, you're happy his sponsors are dropping and think he should get kicked off the air? What happened to freedom of speech?

How may people in the media in the last 8 years have said horrible things about George Bush while he was President and no one called for any action. Oh, the double standards.

Calling someone a racist on baseless grounds and calling someone a megalomaniac for opening the floodgates for big business to rape Iraq, rape the environment, and destroy social incentives in the U.S. contrary to conservative Christian Right beliefs are completely different.

"How inappropriate to call this planet Earth when it is quite clearly Ocean." Sir Arthur C. Clarke

89 (edited by ReturnOfH 08.27.09 16:03)

Re: Politics

ryanthompson wrote:

"The ABC Television Network has a long-standing policy that we do not sell time for advertising that presents a partisan position on a controversial public issue," spokeswoman Susan Sewell said in a written statement. "Just to be clear, this is a policy for the entire network, not just ABC News."

It does seem a bit hypocritical given they aired the Obama special, but hey, that's television for you. My guess is it has something to do with:

ryanthompson wrote:

Dick Morris, a FOX News political analyst and the League of American Voters' chief strategist, conceptualized the advertisement

This part of the article is just silly though:

ryanthompson wrote:

Morris, a onetime advisor to former President Bill Clinton, said he was particularly troubled by ABC's decision not to air the spot.

"It's the ultimate act of chutzpah because ABC is the network that turned itself over completely to Obama for a daylong propaganda fest about health care reform," he said. "For them to be pious and say they will not accept advertising on health care shuts their viewers out from any possible understanding of both sides of this issue."

Of course he's going to feel that way, it's his god damn ad. The way they introduce Morris the second time in the article makes it sound like he's a different guy if you weren't paying any attention. They mention him as being an adviser to Clinton to make it seem like commentary from the 'other side.' I hope people aren't that lazy when they read articles like these, but I suspect it was formatted that way for that reason. Anyway, it's pretty standard practice for television networks to be propaganda devices for the current administration. They all cover speeches, state of the union addresses, etc. unedited. It's not something I enjoy if they don't have criticism or analysis afterward, but it's their choice. It's just one of many reasons I don't watch network television.

Save me, save me, save me from this squeeeeeze...

90

Re: Politics

fucking prick
this is the definition of propoganda
and stupidity
more like sesame street than 'news'
you have to question what demographic you're in if you by into this fool
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_lgTIZ2 … edded#t=60

91

Re: Politics

this vid is propoganda too
but scary nonetheless
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DL5tjGK- … re=channel

92

Re: Politics

Finally a political message I can get behind

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pOuumGX-6uc[/youtube]

93

Re: Politics

glenn beck
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l40a6xPE … edded#t=89
this guy is like a preacher man
no 'liberal' news journalist comes anywhere close to this
scary

94

Re: Politics

MSertic wrote:

Finally a political message I can get behind

Best post on this new thread so far. Japanese Dr. Evil - he should be fronting his own punk band. The finger at the end was classic.

95

Re: Politics

og-azn wrote:
MSertic wrote:

Finally a political message I can get behind

Best post on this new thread so far. Japanese Dr. Evil - he should be fronting his own punk band. The finger at the end was classic.

"NO MATTER HOW MUCH REFORM IS DONE THERE IS NO HOPE"

96

Re: Politics

sounds like most people on this messageboard and everywhere for that matter....

"What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections of human nature?" James Madison

don't act so god-damned shocked and awed that our politicians (both democrats and republicans) no longer serve the best interest of the american citizen, rather, the best interest of the global banking elite and military industrial complex. garbage in, garbage out. our politicians didn't fall out of the sky, they were raised in american homes, american schools, and american churches. presidents, both republicans and democrats, come and go, but the war contracting companies and international banks they take orders from never do. time to reassess the real enemy.

seventy pages of hateful jargon on the previous political thread and two presidential terms later, you guys from both sides of the aisle are still angry and have yet to agree upon anything that will solve our problems. how is that even possible when the majority of you communicate much like the mindless zombies depicted in this video?

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Htyt7yu0NKU[/youtube]

97

Re: Politics

what?
so you have no opinion on anything?
you dont want anything to change ever?
you're just ph-neutral?

98 (edited by sbsurfer 08.28.09 18:06)

Re: Politics

adamwarmington wrote:

what?
so you have no opinion on anything?
you dont want anything to change ever?
you're just ph-neutral?

where in that post did i say that?

of course i want things to change.

how is that going to happen in a country whose people have been tricked into believing the have power when casting a vote? who don't know how to engage in healthy dialogue? who would rather serve themselves than any one else? my point is that the selfishness and greed exhibited by politicians says a great deal about the people whom they govern. how are we going to change when we live in a materialistic society obsessed with over consumption that produces like-minded politicians? seems kind of hard don't you think? how much safer did you feel when bush launched two unconstitutional wars overseas to protect us from "terrorists"? i didn't. how much more financially secure do you or your families feel now that the multi-billion dollar bailouts that bush and the republicans and obama and the democrats have pushed for have increased inflation, and have yet to answer the daunting question of where that money has gone? do you feel any safer that we have now a president who has continuously back tracked on the much anticipated pull out time for our troops in iraq, which is as economically unsound as these bailouts and making us look like imperialistic fools abroad? why should i feel safe about a president who not only backs the patriot act and things like warrant less wire-tapping and the expulsion of Posse Comitatus, but also lied while campaigning for the presidency and said he was against such measures?

believe me i'm very opinionated, it just sucks when the only choices you have in this country's political machine really are between a douche bag and a terd sandwich...

99

Re: Politics

sbsurfer wrote:
adamwarmington wrote:

what?
so you have no opinion on anything?
you dont want anything to change ever?
you're just ph-neutral?

where in that post did i say that?

of course i want things to change.

how is that going to happen in a country whose people have been tricked into believing the have power when casting a vote? who don't know how to engage in healthy dialogue? who would rather serve themselves than any one else? my point is that the selfishness and greed exhibited by politicians says a great deal about the people whom they govern. how are we going to change when we live in a materialistic society obsessed with over consumption that produces like-minded politicians? seems kind of hard don't you think? how much safer did you feel when bush launched two unconstitutional wars overseas to protect us from "terrorists"? i didn't. how much more financially secure do you or your families feel now that the multi-billion dollar bailouts that bush and the republicans and obama and the democrats have pushed for have increased inflation, and have yet to answer the daunting question of where that money has gone? do you feel any safer that we have now a president who has continuously back tracked on the much anticipated pull out time for our troops in iraq, which is as economically unsound as these bailouts and making us look like imperialistic fools abroad? why should i feel safe about a president who not only backs the patriot act and things like warrant less wire-tapping and the expulsion of Posse Comitatus, but also lied while campaigning for the presidency and said he was against such measures?

believe me i'm very opinionated, it just sucks when the only choices you have in this country's political machine really are between a douche bag and a terd sandwich...

i feel ya
and agree
tho turd sandwich and douche bag are a lil off
obamas not perfect
but i'd say it's more turd sandwich or meatball sub

100

Re: Politics

Opposition Party Wins by a Landslide in Japan
Historic Victory Breaks a Half-Century Hammerlock of One-Party Rule

Article: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … id=topnews

Apparently that loony Japanese guy wasn't  alone in his distaste for politics in Japan. They had a vote for change.  I wonder if it's like our great country, where a vote for change really doesn't amount to much.



http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co … id=topnews

101 (edited by JonK 08.31.09 12:51)

Re: Politics

adamwarmington wrote:

there is a difference between news and slander/propoganda

...News ---> Lockerbie bomber 'set free for oil
The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties.

102

Re: Politics

JonK wrote:
adamwarmington wrote:

there is a difference between news and slander/propoganda

...News ---> Lockerbie bomber 'set free for oil
The British government decided it was “in the overwhelming interests of the United Kingdom” to make Abdelbaset Ali Mohmed al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie bomber, eligible for return to Libya, leaked ministerial letters reveal.

Gordon Brown’s government made the decision after discussions between Libya and BP over a multi-million-pound oil exploration deal had hit difficulties.

yeah, if that's true it's lame, i agree - what's your point?
but what has this got to do with the news versus propaganda debate?
do you even know what propaganda is?
you continue to amaze me with your ignorance.

103 (edited by JonK 08.31.09 14:12)

Re: Politics

adamwarmington wrote:

yeah, if that's true it's lame, i agree -...

If?

104 (edited by robbiec 08.31.09 14:26)

Re: Politics

JonK wrote:
adamwarmington wrote:

yeah, if that's true it's lame, i agree -...

If?

I think Adam put "IF" because he's not just accepting information the news propagates as truth... I personally think that's pretty smart... otherwise you just end up believing everything you hear or read and repeating it without thinking for yourself... which pretty much just makes people tools the government can use to perpetuate their misleading manipulative bullshit...

I LOVE HATERS... hahaha

105

Re: Politics

^ or it could be due to naivety