nathanm

Calling into any radiointernet show most often reveals the large disparity of communication skill between host and caller. You are an amateur putting yourself up against the grand master champion of communication, thinking on your feet and public speaking. You're like a student guitarist getting up on stage to do a guitar duel with Joe Satriani or an American Idol contestant singing a duet with Freddie Mercury. Not that it's a competition, but the fact is you are outmatched. Even some of the other "pro" figures have trouble keeping up with Stefan. So it would behoove one to be extra heavy duty prepared before calling. Not that it should be a mandatory thing, but this disparity should be taken into account. Personally I've been humbled by both Harry Browne and Free Talk Live; the limelight shines on you for a few brief moments and you are found wanting. Not recommended for folks who didn't lay down the pwnage in debate club in my opinion.

Walking in deep snow can be easier than walking on a shoveled surface. Up to a point, obviously. Not if the snow is up to your knees. But unless you make sure there's no slush and ice a simple shoveling could be slippery. That's why I make sure to keep a propane heater blasting away at my sidewalk at all times during a snowfall. It's important that my mail gets thrown out properly, by ME, and if the postman can't get to the box safely the mail will just block up the works and explode. Nobody wants that.

Top Ten Ways To Not Collect Fines From People 1. Don't send people fines. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10.

yeh—clos enuf u no wht i ment. grandma knotzys can all tek a lep offa shot peer

Bah! Rules, rulers…are you going to let one lousy letter R make a difference in your understanding of the English language!? It's the same word people, I swear! Don't sweat the details. So…this Purge thing; it could be a slight modification and improvement over what we have now, where for 365 days a year certain people can legally kill, steal and ignore the laws they wrote. Hmmm. However, if this movie features a man inexplicably dangling from a flagpole which is within kicking distance of an apartment window then I will definitely see the shit out of it. Lifeboat: The Movie.

I don't get how it works at all. The numbers apparently have nothing to to with it. I was feeling good about my comment having +30 upvotes on there, but when I logged out of my YouTube account and viewed the page again it doesn't even show up as a top comment, instead a pro-abuser's blather with +10 is at the top. (Non-spanking parenting causes SCHOOL SHOOTINGS don't ya know? F$@&$*@(…&<:"!!!

Some upcoming debates you won't want to miss:

I'm just using "cheating" in the sense of any human interaction which bypasses voluntarism for force. Since everyone in the world is opposed to cheating in professional sports I think to use that as a metaphor for coercion makes sense. If you want to raise money for a project and someone says, "hey let's just steal the money!" that's 'cheating'. My child did something wrong, "Let's just smack him!" that's likewise 'cheating'.

We cannot answer the question of how to be a happy and contented child or parent in a YouTube comment, but we can at least know with certainty what NOT to do. Non-violence should be the default, but unfortunately it isn't. Everybody agrees that stalking and raping isn't the way to win over the person you've got a crush on, but we still think that belting children is some sort of useful tool. Small crimes are not solved by committing bigger crimes. It's pathetic that it even needs to be said, but clearly it does as every time this comes up someone's got their anecdote about how their parents hit them and yet they turned out fine. You can get mass moral outrage over Lance fucking Armstrong's drug use but parents cheating on parenting by using violence doesn't even warrant a reaction.

Commented. Well, I hope I used my FDR training for good. I am now ready for my special shoes and the comet ticket from the bald one.

“The Daily Show's double standard needs to end. It is either pure comedy, with no actual relevance to legitimate political discourse, or it is news -- it can't be both." Exactly!

I see nothing has changed on the Daily Show since I watched it years ago. It's the same smug editing and tone used to mock whomever they are interviewing. It's just a dumb concept, trying to mash together serious issues with comedy in that manner. You can mock things that are more broadly agreed upon, but when you're talking about something like minimum wage with measurable effects making jokes based upon objectively false premises is just stupid. It would indeed be pointless to go on a show like that. We already have the antidote to mainstream news and gazillions of hours worth. Slickly produced propaganda served up in easy to swallow segments is old school and deserves to die. The internet offers you the means to really see what any person is really about. Anyone can be made to look like a goofball within some short, tightly edited piece; even people we might all disagree with passionately probably would look less insane when removed from this sort of production value. The other thing that's complete bullshit is the idea of "it's just comedy". Nonsense. Comedians don't usually say things that are the opposite of what they believe. The tone and delivery is all that's different. The producers of the Schiff segment genuinely believe that raising the wage is a great idea and that Schiff is some rich asshole who doesn't have a clue. Just because it's delivered with a light tone means nothing, you still know where people stand on their beliefs when they are making comedy.

Be wary, internet travelers. If you were to listen to Chomsky at .5x you could go to sleep and never wake up! Or you could listen to Peter Schiff at 2x and shatter time itself!

This is what happens… If you happen to live in a country the USA doesn't like.

Funny that you mentioned that, as I was working on this drawing just the other day. So now I had to finish it.

Definitely stirred up the pot with this one, not surprisingly. Although I was surprised there was not a dark chamber full of exploitation and child abuse to be revealed with this one. What? No Slutwalk Of Family Collapse to be found? He's just good looking and talented and that's it? No sinister controversy!? Rabble! I thought this comment had a good angle on it: ------------------------------The problem people have with Justin Bieber (or at least I have with him) is simple: girls like him, even though he is effeminate and untalented. Us men try very hard to be masculine, because we think it will bring us attractive women, but then Justin Bieber--a completely feminine, weak-looking, generally overrated singer--comes along and destroys everything us men stand for (masculinity) by being the male "super-star" whom women adore. That is the reason I don't like Justin Bieber. ----------------------------- I've wondered why many of the adored celebrity males look so much like women. (Seems to be a hair thing: ONLY on the top of the head!!! No chest or facial hair! Muscles, yes! But not hairy muscles!) But the corollary of this is that if you like being masculine you should not desire the women who are attracted to doll-faced pretty boys in the first place. Win Win! If you're categorizing males you should also categorize the women who are attracted to them as well, then you can hopefully avoid the envy.

Sounds like you need an upgrade. I don't have one myself, but the one my folks got is great. For an extra $10 a month they will arrest pot dealers in the neighborhood and make them do all the lawn maintenance. They have to wear jumpsuits that say "I LOVED SELLING WEED, BUT NOW I PULL THEM" with the name of the Home Owners Association in a wicked stencil font underneath. It's very humiliating, but hey if you don't like it, don't cross the HOA. Inhibiting the economy is planned for the future as well. Ours does lawn maintenance, road maintenance, runs a central swimming pool, playground, tennis courts, etc. This may sound like a government, but they don't run a military, attack other countries, send pot dealers to prison, give subsidies to banks and corporations, inhibit the economy, run a welfare state, force children to go to school, manipulate currencies...

Thanks Kevin, that is helpful advice! Although whenever I see Stef review something I've never seen or heard of I have a curiosity to see how the analysis stacks up. But I think I can pass on Lost. I'd go for Firefly instead. (Thank you, Gardner Goldsmith) I sweetily do recommend that series. Not as long too.

Must be those new Uncooked Meat Flavor Smarties with Powdered Fly Larvae in them. Mmm, delicious.

Testicle stapling? Seriously man, that is soooo last week.

1. I know, but I asked you why you care. You didn't answer that part of it. 2. 93.4285% of Americans with a median income in excess of $10,050,248.28 dollars per fiscal year (from 1956-2011, adjusted for inflation) attributed less than 2.255% of their wealth to either direct government largess or waiver of taxes, fees or other federal and state renumeration.† 3. I would continue to provide the same services as my father did to the best of my ability. But you know, if I found someone who wasn't playing fair by me, then certain things might end up broken, fights breaking out during general inspection and the like, things going missing. It's just a part of the business you know. † Unabridged Volume Of Official Facts and Figures (N. Lummox, et al) Volume 27, Chapter 8, Section 27A-1.2, page 347

Super.bueno, if you believe in the value of making it on your own and not taking any handouts why do you care if other people get them? There's nothing stopping you from living that value, and it's irrelevant if someone else out there is born with a silver spoon. They won't have the same sense of achievement you will and they might even end up blowing the money and ending up poorer than you in the end. There's certainly ample evidence of fame and fortune wrecking people's lives. Legitimately rich people don't bother me at all, but for those who use the State to get rich I would share your contempt. The other thing that doesn't add up is that you want people to pay for the sins of their fathers on one hand but also start with a theoretical 'clean slate' on the other. If you want to hit the reset button for each new life, then you can't hold the child of an evil slave owner accountable for anything their parents did. Totally eliminating the transfer of wealth between generations seems counter-productive. It's a great way to build and progress forward. If my dad owned a business and turned it over to me after he died am I supposed to burn it to the ground and start over? What would be the point? It is of course a huge challenge to give people something for nothing and still maintain the work ethic, but that challenge is not met by eliminating the gift itself.

If the comforts of conforming to popular culture was not established in your young life you will be drawn to 'outsider' types of interests. Not that either one is right or wrong, but that's just the way it goes. There are of course varying degrees of weirdness. For instance, I can't stand to watch people LARPing. I once witnessed a LARP "fight" at a roller derby (a mighty good place to see weird people I might add) and it was the most painfully embarrassing thing I've ever seen. It was like that dream you might have of being naked in school. It's where my admiration of nerds ends. Just can't go there. But then you have something even weirder like the most fanatical religious groups, and then the other weird stuff doesn't seem so bad. The philosophical framework is useful in determining what stuff is weirdcoolinterestingpositive and what is more weirdI was abused as a childnegative. I was going to try and make a peolp joke, but nothing came to mind. That's weird.

Here's what I'd like to know about porn: Person A pays person B to have sex ILLEGAL!!! GO DIRECTLY TO JAIL!!! Person C pays person A and person B to have sex with each other, videotape it, and sell it to the public MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR TOTALLY LEGAL INDUSTRY! yay! Why is prostitution illegal, shady, frowned upon, socially unacceptable and pornography is something most everyday people consume and may just be embarrassed about using? If uncle Jim pays for a prostitute he's a scumbag, but if he's got Playboys in his drawer and dirty movies in the closet, hey no big deal. Apparently adding a third party to a paid sexual transaction is MAGICAL! Or is the recording of it magical? I might understand if all porn was fake like regular movies are fake, but no, that's actual sex they're having and getting paid for it. It makes no sense to me, but I must be missing something obvious. Perhaps because a pornographer can be taxed but two people in an alley cannot?