User Profile: Keep Your Skepticals On

Keep Your Skepticals On

Member Since: October 24, 2011

Comments

123 To page: Go
  • [4] July 16, 2014 at 12:52pm

    This fails to address how and why the GOP continuously undermines tea party candidates and representatives. I don’t care what their “conservative ratings” are if they are corrupt or don’t stand by their principles with anything but fair-weather votes.

    It also fails to address what anyone has to gain from a GOP win without tea party principles – more of the Bush years? a 76 rating from Heritage isn’t going to cut it anymore, not when the 76 is the easy majority votes and other 24 continues to consolidate personal and federal powers.

    The tea party has held out an olive branch to the GOP since the beginning but after the media tossed them out to sea the GOP doesn’t extend a 10-foot pole. Win first and then worry about principles? Don’t think so. When was the last time that was a pleasant surprise and not a major letdown?

    If we go along with this premise, that the tea party should endorse the GOP as the better alternative, we would be doing exactly the same thing as we have the past two decades – the two that gave us the Bushes, Bob Dole, John McCain and Mitt Romney. The era of better alternatives hasn’t exactly been fruitful.

  • [1] July 15, 2014 at 3:40pm

    “This isn’t how our customer service representatives are trained to operate.”

    I call BS. Every time I have had to cancel Comcast I get 20 questions – “Why? Why? Why? Why? Why?” Normally I tell them the 2nd or 3rd time, then they use the answer to market back to me, as this rep did to Mr. Block. And FYI for anyone out there, if you’re willing to call to cancel your service, I have yet to have a time they didn’t offer 30-50% off the monthly fee for 6 months if I told them it was too expensive, which it is.

    To issue a statement this is not how they are trained is really slimy.

    Responses (1) +
  • [2] July 14, 2014 at 8:47pm

    Well he is consistent – his tweets are as coherent as everything else he does.

    Rabbis would and should elect a pope if the pope could dictate over them.

    If women were not dictating social and financial “women’s reproductive health issue” liabilities to men there would not be an issue in the first place.

    It doesn’t take a rocket scientist (but apparently more than one Joss Whedon) to figure out once you make your personal life the responsibility of someone else it become their business. Keep passing personal responsibilities onto society and see if society becomes more or less intrusive. I hate to use the term idiot, but his reasoning is counterproductive at best.

  • [2] July 7, 2014 at 9:17pm

    “…the results suggest that when children learn to read, they rapidly come to regard the written word as a particularly authoritative source of information about how to act in the world,”

    …or it has nothing to do with being comparably “authoritative” but is processed and retained into memory due to the intentional effort to read, the associated visual image memory and enhanced stimulation of comprehension reading requires. Try repeating the same instructions orally three times in a row and accompany it with a strong visual queue – you’ll have the same result. It’s all about mental stimulation, intentional comprehension and memory associations from multiple senses.

    Same reason comprehension of ebooks is lower than that of a real book – the only difference between ebooks is the print, while real books are more unique physically and practically stimulating more senses.

  • [5] July 7, 2014 at 8:25pm

    Whoever considers this racist needs to stop stereotyping black people. Just because someone is black doesn’t mean they dress like a gangsta.

  • July 6, 2014 at 8:27pm

    Bad headline to a bad story. “…traditionally pro-life, but his faith was probably tested…”

    Um, probably not. What is with the false premise that a pro-life stance is dependant on his own daughter? Why assume he never considered the obvious – his own daughter.

    A pro-life guy being supportive of life. Is that really news?

  • July 4, 2014 at 2:35am

    “There’s really no reason why the choice to shave, or not, should be a big deal. But it is, as the students tend to find out quickly.”

    If you label a practice a “societal norm” because a relevant purpose is not immediately obvious, this is the kind of conclusion box you paint yourself into. It’s not good research to start with a false premise.

  • [1] July 4, 2014 at 1:00am

    You totally missed the point.

    With all of the comparatives you presented the first step to treating the conditions is changing the causation behavior to prevent the need for medical treatment. Take note: Everyone with anything to say will intervene with the message that the risky behavior is the cause and the behavior needs to change to prevent the need for treatment. Is that true for unwanted pregnancy?

    Birth control, as relevant to this discussion, is not a medical treatment for a health problem. It’s a single treatment for a well known side effect cause by a single behavior. Under any other circumstances culture and the medical community would be telling people that don’t want to get sick from venom to stop playing with poisonous snakes or to at least do so safely. But instead here we are mandating that employers provide free antidote and denigrating anyone who calls attention to the behavior introducing the risk in the first place.

    That is actually the biggest problem here – telling people they are financially responsible for someone’s very personal choices while calling foul on anyone who dare decry the choices they are financially responsible for. Either open up all behaviors paid for on the public dime to public scrutiny -or- don’t make the public pay for it. Can’t expect to make someone pay for something and not have an opinion about it.

    Not to mention you confuse “did a certain thing” with “doing certain things over a long period of time”

  • June 28, 2014 at 1:57am

    So, one theater in Detroit decided a revised version of the ad that included the line “If you think they can sing and dance, you should see them in handcuffs!” wasn’t accepted over the ad that was already seen and accepted in other cities…

    And? An ad for the movie was accepted, just not the one with that line. It’s a bad line anyway – going by that add alone with that line makes it sound like the movie in the ad goes beyond satirical to plain spiteful. It’s not very clear to headline a supposedly serious movie with a joke – it go rejected on the basis of being a bad ad.

  • June 17, 2014 at 12:50pm

    Bingo.

    The problem these studies are the premise for institutions to abolish “punishment” for a purely “positive reinforcement” structure.

    The problem is, as should be pointed out in the study, not every child responds to positive reinforcement.

  • [2] June 7, 2014 at 12:45am

    Interesting…. they really want to compete with the other 999 Atheist networks?

  • [-1] May 31, 2014 at 11:07am

    I’ve know too many people over the years who were “born gay” in to/out of puberty, but now are married with children. Also know a few people who after decades of marriage & family suddenly figured out they were gay.

    Sexual preference is just that – preference. Genetic and environmental factors can influence preference but neither dictate it nor exclude it from conscious consideration. Like all behavioral preferences, it’s a product of the subconscious, which is often neither logical nor predictable. Two people with identical genetics and identical environments will not have identical mental development and mental development is never static. It is the sum of all three that create the personality.

  • [1] May 18, 2014 at 3:22pm

    Box office openings don’t really mean much. Is this movie any good or not?

    As a family that enjoys the real Godzilla movies, how accurate is the PG-13 rating? Is it just intense or did they throw in as much sex, drugs, blood & gore as they thought they could get away with while keep the PG-13? And more importantly – is it true to the franchise?

    Responses (2) +
  • [1] May 17, 2014 at 10:15am

    If the critics were honest, they would just come out and say it “This isn’t Mom’s Gone Wild”. That’s really why they don’t like it, that’s why the audience does.

  • May 8, 2014 at 5:52am

    “Ford saw the relationship between the stability of workers and the stability of the economy as a whole and he tried to forge a policy that would lesson the shocks of the business cycle.”

    Ok – so Ford was head of a wildly successful, profitable business making cars through “wave after wave” of economic uncertainty. After much success, he then stopped to considered how unstable the economy was as a whole and took it upon himself to pay his workers more to stabalize it, because in theory that capital investment would eventually net a return in the future.

    Or – Ford calculated he would have an immediate gain in profit by paying his workers enough to reduce exorbitant turn-over costs.

    There seems to be a very direct connection to Ford’s policy and naked capitalism, and a direct opposition from Ford toward FDR. The connection from FDR claiming altruism by edict is equivelant to Ford’s mutually beneficial business decisions seems to be the convoluted arguement.

    Did Ford really support the ideals of FDR or do you just figure that because Ford and FDR both share the phrase “raised wages” they therefore share net results?

  • [2] May 8, 2014 at 4:48am

    Try this: “With his [ONGOING] wage policy, Ford also fired a shot across the bow of Roosevelt’s New Deal, which he vehemently opposed, believing that higher wages and less restriction on business, and not higher taxes, would benefit the country.”

    The point is that Ford didn’t accidentally discover raising wages eases poverty – he made a sound business decision that was good for his company and his workers in the circumstances of the time – and he later vehemently disagreed with the federal policies that claimed to use him as an example.

    The arguement is Ford’s policies were successful because they made good business sense – first. The arguement that artificially inflating wages is universally beneficial in all circumstances, even without immediate benefit is the arguement that is absurd. If high wages places goods/services out of demand, even just in the short term, that “what goes around comes around” fairy isn’t coming around for a visit before next month’s payroll is due.

  • [1] April 24, 2014 at 4:27pm

    Maybe I’m missing something, but the vast majority of abortions are based on socioeconomic circumstances, no? She’s just being candid about it – upsetting the pro-abortion crowd because it calls the morality of “women’s choice” into question.

  • April 21, 2014 at 9:51pm

    If anything it adds credibility when advice comes from those who have made the mistake and been living with it.

  • April 17, 2014 at 12:21pm

    Are you sure you’re reading this right?

    It seems to me these rule are the opposite, even if poorly written. Examine the opposite of each rule and it will put it in better context.

  • April 17, 2014 at 12:15pm

    If these are Obama’s rules, he’s failed them.

123 To page: Go