Just now, Larry said:

 

 

It was . . . a response to the post I quoted?  You know, this one?  

 

Yea, is that all you got? Do you understand how weak that joke was? Do you understand how people who may have wives or daughter or sisters who have been raped would react when they hear **** like that? My wife was raped at 19 and had an abortion, this is real life and people don't think that **** is funny.

It says something about a person, when they make a joke like that. It says something about the relationship they have with women in general and what kind of heart they have. You need to really take a second and put yourself in someones shoes who has been raped and then ask yourself was that **** funny?

Jesus Christ, what in the **** is wrong with people?

12 hours ago, Larry said:

 

I'm pretty sure that impregnating women without their consent is called "rape", or something like that.  

 

Pretty sure it's illegal.  In all 50 states.  

 

If not, then I've been missing out on a lot of fun, over the years.  

What the **** is this ****? And it's pretty telling that TWA laughed at it.

 

Chad Grimm (it says in the title of the youtube)

Anybody been reading up on Dr Giulio Tononi's work Consciousness via the framework of Integrated Information Theory?

I bring it up here, because his work is seeking to provide a framework for answering what are the criteria and commensurate threshold levels that need to be met for consideration of the presence of consciousness. Eventually this could prove to be a better determinant for when abortion can and cannot be done rather than things like heartbeat or whatever.
 

Quote

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/full/10.1098/rstb.2014.0167

Abstract

The science of consciousness has made great strides by focusing on the behavioural and neuronal correlates of experience. However, while such correlates are important for progress to occur, they are not enough if we are to understand even basic facts, for example, why the cerebral cortex gives rise to consciousness but the cerebellum does not, though it has even more neurons and appears to be just as complicated. Moreover, correlates are of little help in many instances where we would like to know if consciousness is present: patients with a few remaining islands of functioning cortex, preterm infants, non-mammalian species and machines that are rapidly outperforming people at driving, recognizing faces and objects, and answering difficult questions. To address these issues, we need not only more data but also a theory of consciousness—one that says what experience is and what type of physical systems can have it. Integrated information theory (IIT) does so by starting from experience itself via five phenomenological axioms: intrinsic existence, composition, information, integration and exclusion. From these it derives five postulates about the properties required of physical mechanisms to support consciousness. The theory provides a principled account of both the quantity and the quality of an individual experience (a quale), and a calculus to evaluate whether or not a particular physical system is conscious and of what. Moreover, IIT can explain a range of clinical and laboratory findings, makes a number of testable predictions and extrapolates to a number of problematic conditions. The theory holds that consciousness is a fundamental property possessed by physical systems having specific causal properties. It predicts that consciousness is graded, is common among biological organisms and can occur in some very simple systems. Conversely, it predicts that feed-forward networks, even complex ones, are not conscious, nor are aggregates such as groups of individuals or heaps of sand. Also, in sharp contrast to widespread functionalist beliefs, IIT implies that digital computers, even if their behaviour were to be functionally equivalent to ours, and even if they were to run faithful simulations of the human brain, would experience next to nothing.

1 hour ago, Destino said:

I agree that it was wrong, I just can't get on board with treating this as something monstrous.  Parents stack the deck in their kids favor in a variety of ways from small innocent things to bigger more overt actions.  Some examples: "helping" with their homework, a bit too much.  Getting them into a programs they otherwise wouldn't get into because you're friends with a guy that knows a guy.  Getting them a job later in life using your own connections.  Paying for a lawyer when their kids get into some serious trouble. 

 

So yes, this was definitely wrong.  I just don't have any outrage in me for this.

It's not about outrage, it's about what behavior we do or do not accept and the consequence we apply to it, in order to stop or limit the escalation of that behavior. If left unchecked, corrupt behavior will continue to escalate, it is a cancer, it has no self-restraint. We used to be a country that at least tried to give the appearance that we cared about and aspired to hold merit and integrity in high esteem, but now our society doesn't even care about being trustworthy or doing things the right way. So many people instead aspire to be con-men or gangsters and people have no problems publicly saying it's okay to **** other people over as long as it's legal (or you don't get caught). What kind of **** is that? Do people not understand the pragmatic point of morals, the necessity of a large chunk of people keeping the faith in order for a system to properly function?

 

I believe that trust is placed in the people that hold the power.  If someone is taking bribes than they have changed the rules by doing so.  It's not like rich parents are running around with their checkbooks out asking everyone on campus what their price is for getting their kid in.  It's the bribe takers that essentially open up shop, and when they do parents are asked to let their kid fail or cross an ethical boundary for their children.  It's really not surprising that parents with the means, and faced with this proposition, agree to pay the money. 

Trust is not just the responsibility of our "leaders". We are responsible for it as well. We are the stewards of trust as a societal mechanism in that it is our responsibility to bring consequences to those that breach that trust. We are the ones who protect it, when leaders neglect it. You say "it's not like rich parents are running around with..." Are you sure about that? If these parents aren't given any impactful consequences this behavior will escalate. It is idiocy to expect self-restraint from corruption. Do you think Trump is all of the sudden going to say, you know what I've corrupted and fleeced enough from the US, I'll stop all that and start showing some self-restraint and accountability? **** no. These people are the same. They won't stop themselves and you're fooling yourself if you don't think these parents were just as responsible for this as the people they paid off. This isn't like a drug dealer lacing a blunt with crack in order to get people hooked on a drug they had no interest in trying. With these parents the interest was mutual. The demand was always there.

 

Americans are all about this idea that relying on family stunts your growth and dooms you to failure.  I even read articles where the writer is horrified that some adult kids still live at home.  Maybe they're right, but I certainly don't subscribe to it. 

Really? That's an overly extreme and myopic position. I didn't grow up like that, but I'm born from mixed parents and strong family support structures in conjunction with working and earning my way. Cheating is what corrupts your growth, using leverage is literally a trade off between doing stuff under your own power and gaining positive adaptations as a result versus using outside leverage to succeed but miss out on the adaptations and positive internal change. Again, there is a difference between supporting and helping children so they can get the proper adaptations versus leveraging their entire lives in the name of comfort while they never change and grow hollow/stale.
 

As for the system, the US education system is built around the idea of paying for advantage.  Compare public schools in a poor area, to those in wealthy areas, to good private schools, to elite boarding schools.  It's crystal clear how things are meant to work. 

Do you really feel that was the original intent or is what we have now a corruption of it? I don't follow or accept how this corrupt ass **** is supposed to go down and I don't play along to get along. If other people want to bow down, that's there choice, but I can't do that and call myself a man. That's why I came to the realization that to be a con-man or a gangster is to be a **** and a follower and changed my life. Destroying and corrupting **** around you, just because others do it or because life is too hard and too painful and unfair is a **** ass excuse and a **** reason for living a certain way. I understand life is hard and sometimes hurting others or adding to corruption seems like a good choice to get ahead, but a person needs have their eyes open to what their doing and take responsibility for their weakness rather than try to excuse it and get off that path as soon as possible. 
 

Keep in mind that I'm not saying these parents should get away with it.  I think they deserve a criminal record and a steep fine.  I'd just prefer prison be reserved for criminals the public has an interests and getting off the streets.  We jail too many people as it is.  I don't see the need for parents that tried to bribe a corrupt college gatekeeper to end up in prison.   

If the parents don't get hit with consequences that impact and change their lives then they are getting away with it. A fine isn't going to do anything to bring about change and neither is a criminal record because most of them are already established and connected so they don't even have to worry about the same hiring process as normal people. Prison can be a great wake up call and a constructive experience if used properly and I'm speaking from experience. These rich mother****ers are the ones who need prison the most, they need to be pulled out of their comfort bubble and forced to experience real life so they can adapt and change. Their culture needs to feel and understand that they are not above the law, so they behave accordingly. And really the rich are the ones who are in the best position to go to jail for a bit and be okay after release and probation. They won't be homeless after jail or the ones who can't get work because of their record. I can't speak on what might happen in jail, but we all have to take those risks, from people stealing quarters from a laundry mat, to the dude selling weed in the cut, to rich ass parents bribing people for their worthless ass kids.

Again, the whole point of this isn't about feeding outrage. It's about setting up consequences that cause the right kinds of positive change, while inhibiting the escalation and perpetuation of destructive and corrupt behavior.

For real, **** these parents and what the hell is this expectation to lie and cheat and do all sorts of **** for your kid? My parents weren't like that, because they knew it was important to have a global sense of responsibility and preservation as well an individual sense. I sucked at learning that responsibility and went to prison myself as a result, but that ultimately helped me learn and practice it. A parent is failing their own and their child's development if they can't understand that you don't break the system to help your kid. We all depend on a threshold level of trust and good faith for this ecosystem of a society to work.

There is a line you don't cross. Help your kid, support your kid, but don't **** up the system to give your kid a free ride because he or she never developed the capability to make it on your own. **** those parents and **** those kids till they learn otherwise and actually earn their way.

He kind of resembles Brian Mitchell, doesn't he? Like in the face. Both special teams aces in different ways, although in saying that Terry has some big shoes to fill.

I saw on Redskins Nation that Josh Harvey Clemons added 20 lbs this off-season. Who knows how much of that stays over the course of camp, and how his speed is affected are still a question, but it's cool to see him putting in the effort to be an every down LB

Some Suburban State Lawmakers Are Leaving the GOP

Since the midterm elections, Republican legislators in California, Kansas and New Jersey have switched to the Democratic party.

https://www.governing.com/topics/politics/gov-california-kansas-party-switch-lawmaker.html

‘If this is the new normal, I want no part of it’: Citing Trump, Iowa’s longest-serving Republican leaves party

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/04/24/if-this-is-new-normal-i-want-no-part-it-citing-trump-iowas-longest-serving-republican-leaves-party/?utm_term=.809adf5a5f8b

Finally got my hands on a cut of Cap's MAC 1 strain. So excited. I love DC, the quality you can find is better than any dispensary I've rolled through in Colorado.

3 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Maybe he meant he was ruling out impeachment proceedings................ for today's session?

Nah

 

Quote

“Based on what we have seen to date, going forward on impeachment is not worthwhile at this point,” Hoyer said in an interview with CNN’s Dana Bash. “Very frankly, there is an election in 18 months and the American people will make a judgment.”

Hoyer is such a ****. How do you say impeachment isn't worthwhile at this point? Nadler at least has the stones to say it's at least a possibility at this time.

I'd say a burden of absolute proof is ridiculous and insurmountable. You're not going to get absolute certainty, there is always going to be a gap, because the gap is part of the design. It provides combustion, impetus, conatus, etc. which compels movement.

People talk about the first mover, or what moved what first, but what if it was the very inherent incompleteness that self-compelled movement? It's why we move. To fill the void, whether it be a void to fill with air for our lungs, food for our stomach, meaning for our mind, or connection for our heart and soul.

Anybody doing anything special for 4:20? There are festivals and stuff in the city, but eh. 

I’m thinking I might do something like 4 grams of green composed of 20 different strains for a super entourage effect. I was originally gonna j it up, but **** I hate combustion. I think it’s all going in the volcano instead. Should be super tasty. 

Regarding the whole, if god exists why is there suffering? question.

A possibility that I operate from, is basically that as bad as that suffering might be, it would be much, much worse to try to alleviate that suffering by violating or damaging the very structure of the universe to do so. There is a tethering of the very fabric of the universe, that precludes from the manifestation of real "absolute" absolutes, due to the simple fact that ultimate absolutes are ultimately static positions and nothing in this universe seems to be ultimately static. Everything moves/reacts and changes in response to other moving and changing shapes of life, so therefore the possibility to move and change must always be present and can't be cut off in some absolute way (the uncertainty principle touches on this in a sense). Which brings me back to the point, that as horrible as human suffering is, it maybe ain't **** compared to the absolute horror of an absolute static state. 

If we are truly stardust, then we need to be humble and recognize how hard and painful life truly can be as it grows and becomes more complex. There are time frames where conceivably, life toils for thousands of years in fire and mud, before even reaching the threshold of simple organisms on the level of an amoeba. Compared to that stress and death and scratching survival, the suffering of humans is not the worst hell imaginable.

Everything, even "miracles" have a golidlocks zone process that can't be short-cut. If you do short-cut the process, then you lose out on the adaptations/changes needed to fully realize the cumulative change or end result that was intended. I doubt God takes short-cuts, because I doubt God succumbs to the pressure or lacks the understanding/foresight to make the mistake of doing so.

1 hour ago, Gamebreaker said:

I didn't buy Sam's emotion over his asshole father and brother being killed for not bending the knee. He understands how these things work, you don't bend the knee...you die. Period. Also, his father basically sentenced him to death by sending him to the Night's Watch, with the expectation that he had no hope of surviving there. His brother was basically a mini version of his dad. It just seemed like the writer's wanted us to completely forgot only Dany has been treated worse by her own family, and want us to believe Sam should react like a normal person who had a loving family.

There are certain kinds of kids that when they get abused by a parent, they don't stop loving the parent, they stop loving themselves.

That's why these people need jail time. This class and justifiably so has the belief that if you throw enough money at it, you can insulate yourself from the repercussions of jail time. Jail is not a perfect deterrent, but it is a much better deterrent than no confinement at all.

I don't feel like any society we've had so far has been all that great. We're a C- species at best.

9 minutes ago, Sacks 'n' Stuff said:

This isn’t hard. It’s like schools, police, roads, etc. The greatest good could come from the government insuring that everyone has access to the basic ______ that they need. If you’ve got the money and you want to send your kids to a private school, hire private security, take a toll road, or purchase increased coverage or have Dr. James Andrews do your knee surgery, you still can.

Exactly, there are supposed to be threshold levels. X is the basic threshold level no one should fall under and Y is upper threshold limit no one should exceed, given that exceeding Y brings about the slippage of people under threshold X.

You have a floor and a ceiling and in between those limits a goldilocks zone. And there is a tension, a balance between the floor and ceiling that must be protected and maintained as humans progress and adapt, so that society can enjoy the fruits of that zone.

2 minutes ago, twa said:

Those rich folks paying medical bills enables drs and hospitals to treat the poor.....and live well

Eh. I'd say those middle class folk are doing more of the lifting there. Why not give them a shout out?

24 minutes ago, TheGreatBuzz said:

Rich does not always equal stronger or smarter, but on a large scale it makes sense that the more successful a person is the "better" they are.  Obviously there are exceptions (cough.......Trump......cough).

 

Eh, I'd say this only holds true in a meritocracy, of which our country is becoming ever more less so, and only then for the person who actually garnered the wealth, not so for the people benefiting from it. In those cases the wealth is sheltering the beneficiaries from the things in life that would diminish capacity and providing every bit of leverage and opportunity to augment their "natural" or base-line level competency. We have a problem in this country with differentiating between merit and privilege.

The quote from above is a sad belief in a way and I'd say its a prime part of the cultural obsequiousness right wingers have to the rich. They see the rich as superior to others and those who aren't rich want to be superior as well. Couple that with good old american greed and the consequent twisting of freedom by it and you have a group of people who glorify the rich and see money as the path to freedom FROM consequences.  A society where eventually there is no character or community and everything is transactional. 
 

3 minutes ago, Popeman38 said:

So for 22 months we hear that Mueller is above reproach, has the chops to conduct a thorough investigation, and everyone says if he is allowed to complete his investigation, they will be satisfied with whatever he finds. Now, less than a week after he has finished and without actually knowing what the report actually says, people are stating the whole thing was a sham (implying Mueller was a stooge)? 

 

Good grief. Wag the dog much?

Eh, I’d pump the brakes on all that for a minute. You got one guy saying that in response to the possibility of evident charges being declinated. And another posting a **** load of qualifiers before possibly coming to that conclusion. 

I think its natural, given the circumstances to have a what the **** is going on kind of feeling right now. There are clear charges of at least perjury that have not been pursued and we all want to know why. 

Patience can be a struggle in these times, it’ll take people some time to get there. 

9 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said:

I think I have finally accepted that nothing is going to happen to him before hiss term is up (many here called it from the beginning, but I just refused to accept it).

 

I hope we vote his ass out, and when he no longer has 1600 Penn ave to protect him, I hope he gets hit with a cat 5 ****storm that lands him in prison.

It isn't looking good, but I'm not there yet till we see nothing come from the Dem's getting a hold of the Mueller Report and more importantly whatever it is SDNY, EDVA, and others got cooking.

18 minutes ago, No Excuses said:

The new brain dead conspiracy on the right is that AOC is a paid actress, trained to run for Congress and fed talking points by her handlers. 

 

Just so we’re all aware of how the right is evolving in this country. A dumpster fire of bad ideas and gullible dolts who will believe anything. 

Sounds like they're just projecting what they had with Trump and Reagan in a sense.

Just now, Llevron said:

Yall need to stop. You know good and damn well hes not open to any facts you present. None of them. 

 

He doesn't trust anything you have to say or any of your sources, and why should he? 

It's better to point out that everything he posted was a bull**** narrative to begin with, rather than try to argue the bull**** points of what he's trying to say. Nip it in the bud and move on in my view.