What's That? We Aren't Raising a Generation of Overly Sensitive Snowflakes?

[JoeRaisin]

Are you Sure?

https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/middle-school-students-superlative-award-makes-fun-adhd-231813950.html

"Don't you DARE give me a DUI, Officer... it's not my fault and I feel I
am being punished and shamed for being an alcoholic... It's not my
fault... I'm possessed or something..."



--
Narcissistic control freaks always consider their perceptions and
opinions to be obvious and true.
- Frank "Socrates"

How twisted are our Politics that revelation of truth is considered
"interfering" with an election?

[CW]

On Sat 20 May 2017 02:47:27p JoeRaisin wrote:

> Are you Sure?
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/middle-school-students-superlative-award-mak

> es-fun-adhd-231813950.html
>
> "Don't you DARE give me a DUI, Officer... it's not my fault and I feel I
> am being punished and shamed for being an alcoholic... It's not my
> fault... I'm possessed or something..."
>

Did you read it all the way through to the end?

"Another Reddit user named “fresh” illustrated why the award was wrong with
equally tasteless analogies: “I hope they have the cripple kid ‘most likely
to lose a race.’ Also the blind kid, ‘most likely to not see that coming.’”

[ByTor]

In article <ofq6a2$q99$1...@dont-email.me>, joerai...@yahoo.com says...

>
> Are you Sure?
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/middle-school-students-superlative-award-makes-fun-adhd-231813950.html
>
> "Don't you DARE give me a DUI, Officer... it's not my fault and I feel I
> am being punished and shamed for being an alcoholic... It's not my
> fault... I'm possessed or something..."

I mean the awards thing is kinda funny and I've seen people with
disabilities have a *better* sense of humor about their situations than
people that would easily get offended *FOR* them, butin today's society
everything seems to be scrutinized. I had plenty of insecurities growing
up, social pressures, rejections, made fun of, but I was never handed an
excuse *not* to deal with them or others *made* excuses for me with a
bunch of psychobabble. Maybe a generation thing I have NO idea. But of
course being from any specific generation (older) we don't *understand*
the *current* generation, at least thats what these kids try to tell me
these days. ;)

http://www.psychiatryadvisor.com/adhd/a-true-adhd-epidemic-or-an-
epidemic-of-overdiagnosis/article/429034/

https://tinyurl.com/mmoeexv (copy/paste ADHD impaired)


I've read a few other articles like this. Overdiagnose is discussed in
this article and is basically my concern I suppose. I'm SURE there are
legitimate causes of ADHD but it gets thrown around very easily. My
daughter was in Colorado for awhile and damn near *half* the high school
was diagnosed ADHD. While some were cons to get ritalin just makes you
wonder how easily this shit gets thrown around *adding* to the excuses
list for not taking responsibility.

It seems "excessive" demands keep coming up? Our education system is to
demanding? Parents are stressed making kids stressed?

[Eyem]

Beat a mental health care tyrant to death with baseball bats

[JoeRaisin]

No, another Reddit user named fresh brought up an awards that /would/ be
wrong. Awards that the school in question did not offer.

And I guess you are okay with the term "cripple" which is offensive and
denigrating. Why, just by making that post you may have caused some
"Differently Capable" person incurable emotional scars.

[Skeezix LaRocca]

On 05/20/2017 03:47 PM, JoeRaisin wrote:
> Are you Sure?
>
> https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/middle-school-students-superlative-award-makes-fun-adhd-231813950.html
>
>
> "Don't you DARE give me a DUI, Officer... it's not my fault and I feel I
> am being punished and shamed for being an alcoholic... It's not my
> fault... I'm possessed or something..."
>
>
>

Wow, that's some cruel stuff to throw on a kid, especially when they
know the kid has that condition...The poor little bastard gets
unfavorable attention, then made fun of. That has got to have an bad
effect on her.

[JoeRaisin]

I know, right. Next thing you know folks are gonna have expectations of
kids with this disorder. They may decide to expect the kids to grow up
and deal with life on life's terms - that's just crazy talk.

Grades? Pfft! Grades are highly judgmental... and we shouldn't judge.
Completing what you start? What the hell do you think we're running here?

We should all get credit just for showing up... results should be
considered a bonus.

When you order coffee at your favorite stop and they never get around to
actually giving it to you, you should still pay for it and walk away
happily - you don't know what hardship that Barista is undergoing... and
it's none of your business.

The guy at the oil change place got distracted and didn't put the oil
filter on correctly? It's okay... he's got ADHD so you shouldn't bear
any animosity... you shouldn't even expect the business to reimburse you
for your ruined engine... I mean they were courageous enough to hire
someone with such a debilitating handicap so you should just suck it
up, buttercup.

I grew up ADHD and still have adult ADD. Are there some challenges?
Sure. Do I sometimes screw up and feel like I've not only let down
others, but myself as well? Yep.

Do I want to run a hot bubble bath and slit my wrists while listening to
Antonio Pappano's Carmen just because someone gave me a little shit for
having a short attention span? Not so far...

Snowflakes are throwing stones at a paper tiger in a glass house of
cards while waiting for the other shoe to drop.

[CW]

On Sun 21 May 2017 06:01:51a JoeRaisin wrote:

> On 5/20/2017 3:48 PM, CW wrote:
>> On Sat 20 May 2017 02:47:27p JoeRaisin wrote:
>>
>>> Are you Sure?
>>>
>>> https://www.yahoo.com/beauty/middle-school-students-superlative-award-m
>>> ak es-fun-adhd-231813950.html
>>>
>>> "Don't you DARE give me a DUI, Officer... it's not my fault and I feel
>>> I am being punished and shamed for being an alcoholic... It's not my
>>> fault... I'm possessed or something..."
>>>
>>
>> Did you read it all the way through to the end?
>>
>> "Another Reddit user named “fresh” illustrated why the award was wrong
>> with equally tasteless analogies: “I hope they have the cripple kid
>> ‘most likely to lose a race.’ Also the blind kid, ‘most likely to not
>> see that coming.’”
>>
>
> No, another Reddit user named fresh brought up an awards that /would/ be
> wrong. Awards that the school in question did not offer.
>
> And I guess you are okay with the term "cripple" which is offensive and
> denigrating. Why, just by making that post you may have caused some
> "Differently Capable" person incurable emotional scars.
>

Yeah, well everyone knows I'm evil incarnate. And to be quite honest,
there aren't maany lines I'm not willing to cross for one reason or
another, at one time or another. But /we/ weren't talking about what *I*
find offensive. What /we/ were talking about was where one draws the line
between that which is offensive and that which is not.

If I'm reading you right (which I may not be, what with all your thinly
veiled snark) is that poking fun at someone's /disability/ is fine, just
so long as you don't 'cross the line' and refer to them using a
degrogatory term. Do I have that right? Or is your criteria for where you
draw your line even more nuanced/complex?

[JoeRaisin]

I could give a shit... cross all the lines you want to cross. Just
don't be a hypocrite about it.

You gonna bitch about someone getting teased about ADD, you shouldn't
use the term "cripple".

Or are you the arbiter of all that is or is not acceptable? I suppose
all your perceptions and opinions are obvious and true.

But to answer your question - I don't see ADD as being a "disability".
It's simply a different brain chemistry. the best description is to
think about a brain like a radio - some folks tune their radio to a
certain station and leave it there. An ADD brain is always on scan.
But it does not "disable" anything. In fact, it often opens up a lot of
creativity.

I was diagnosed as a kid, and re-diagnosed as an adult. Does it come
with challenges? Yes. Does a poor attention span and random comments
(that make perfect sense to me) invite some teasing? Almost every day.
But I don't whine and cry and get offended because I'm not a snowflake.

It's nothing compared to those with real challenges. Disabilities that
lower the IQ significantly or limit what a person can do, physically,
are far more challenging. Making fun of those folks is just plucking low
hanging fruit... and since you are sensitive enough to the plight of the
attention deficit I was quite shocked that you don't think physically
handicapped folks weren't worthy of the same respect.

What an odd world where teasing about a short attention span is heinous
yet calling someone in a wheelchair a "cripple" is just dandy.

Unless, of course, you were being contrary just to be contrary... now
there's a disability... albeit a social one.

And I will have you know that my snark is not intended to be "thinly
veiled". I put it right out there for all to see. If it doesn't come
across that way or I haven't expressed myself in an easily understood
way, you aren't allowed to say anything about it... I have this
condition, you see...

[Skeezix LaRocca]

Fuck, you're really reaching..Did someone piss in your cornflakes ?

Holding kids accountable in spite of real, or supposed conditions is one
thing, but for faculty to point out a fault for the whole student body ?

[JoeRaisin]

LOL- because until they did that, no one noticed...

[CW]

Okay, so having a *debilitating* handicap is where you draw your line. I
get it.

What I mean is that I get how calling a cripple a cripple (or a retard
a retard) might be deemed offensive to some. And while I may think it's a
hoot to call someone a 'tard, you're right, it really is the lowest form
of humor. Easy pickins' to be sure. But teasing someone about their short
attention span, or their lisp or a stutter, or a cleft pallet, halitosis,
Tourrette's Syndrome, club foot, non-debilitating deformity, and so on
amd so forth... now *that* is some funny shit!!! Not only is it funny, but
it's instructive too; it toughens them little bastards up and helps them
learn how to face life on life's terms.

Am I to take it that you also endorse making jokes about Father's Day in
Detroit? or celebrating Hitler's birthday by having a bake sales at
Auschwitz? or questioning the need for a dog-catcher in certain Asian
neighborhoods?

[CW]

On Sun 21 May 2017 10:11:54a JoeRaisin wrote:


>

> Unless, of course, you were being contrary just to be contrary... now
> there's a disability... albeit a social one.
>

Damn! contrariness... on Usenet? Is it some sort of syndrome?

I suppose it's only right that you get to name it (seeing as how you're the
one who first discovered its existence)....

[RobD]

When someone refers to people as "chucks" or "snowflakes," I suspect it
might be best to just walk away.

These are usages that appear to come out of the alt.right.

And these are some truly awful people. There is no reasoning with them, and
I have learned t not waste my time.

Can't say I'm perfect in holding to that discipline, CW, but I'm trying.

[ByTor]

In article <oft628$ji2$1...@dont-email.me>, no_e...@invalid.invalid
says...

I've heard many from the alt.left get just as colorful. Just sayin.

[RobD]

What is the "alt.left?" I haven't heard that term before, and not about to
assume I know what it is.

(I'd never have guessed what the "alt.right" was, having only seen the form
in "alt-country." You cannot really derive the meaning of one from the
other.)

[Socrates]

On 5/21/2017 5:00 PM, ByTor wrote:

> Rob wrote:

>> When someone refers to people as "chucks" or "snowflakes," I suspect it
>> might be best to just walk away.
>>
>> These are usages that appear to come out of the alt.right.
>>
>> And these are some truly awful people. There is no reasoning with them, and

>> I have learned to not waste my time.

>>
>> Can't say I'm perfect in holding to that discipline, CW, but I'm trying.

> I've heard many from the alt.left get just as colorful. Just sayin.

Colorful? That leaves it pretty wide open not to mention generous in
this ("chucks and snowflakes") example. How about Alex Jones, or Glen
Beck, or Bill O'Reilly, or Sean Hannity, or Ann Coulter?

Are they merely "colorful?" Who on the left is "just as colorful?"

[ByTor]

In article <oftee2$7t3$1...@dont-email.me>, no_e...@invalid.invalid
says...

Than what does alt.right mean? Alternate right? So an alt.left,
alternate left, doeesn't exist? I don't get the cryptics. Please explain
to me than what alt.right means? You wrote it. There's no comparable
left to it as well?

[ByTor]

In article <oftgja$au9$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

So you think that there are no equals on the left that are just as
extreme as those assholes you mentioned above? I can't stand any of
them. And no I'm not going to point out the lefts colorful people
either. Thats up to you to admit. These type of micro debates are
stupid.

Why are you guys just NOT understanding that I am NOT a supporter of the
this party *against* another party crap? If someone points out ONLY left
negativity I ask them what about the right? If someone only talks about
the rights negativity I ask them same thing, what about the left? Is it
NOT hard to understand that someone can actually be neutral, hate things
done on BOTH sides and loathe partisan bullshit and not always assumed
to be defending any one side?

You guys give me a headache.......LMAO......Guess I'm spending more time
here lately than usual.

[Socrates]

On 5/21/2017 8:07 PM, ByTor wrote:

> Rob D. wrote:

>> What is the "alt.left?" I haven't heard that term before, and not about to
>> assume I know what it is.
>>
>> (I'd never have guessed what the "alt.right" was, having only seen the form
>> in "alt-country." You cannot really derive the meaning of one from the
>> other.)

> Than what does alt.right mean? Alternate right? So an alt.left,
> alternate left, doeesn't exist? I don't get the cryptics. Please explain
> to me than what alt.right means? You wrote it. There's no comparable
> left to it as well?

Seek and you shall find.

http://tinyurl.com/hpxkjnf

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2017/02/alt-stand-170218115042196.html

[ByTor]

In article <oftp25$to4$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

Well thanks I'll read it..........Is there one for the extremes of the
left to?

[Socrates]

On 5/21/2017 8:15 PM, ByTor wrote:
> In article <oftgja$au9$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...
>>
>> On 5/21/2017 5:00 PM, ByTor wrote:
>>> Rob wrote:
>>
>>>> When someone refers to people as "chucks" or "snowflakes," I suspect it
>>>> might be best to just walk away.
>>>>
>>>> These are usages that appear to come out of the alt.right.
>>>>
>>>> And these are some truly awful people. There is no reasoning with them, and
>>>> I have learned to not waste my time.
>>>>
>>>> Can't say I'm perfect in holding to that discipline, CW, but I'm trying.
>>
>>> I've heard many from the alt.left get just as colorful. Just sayin.
>>
>> Colorful? That leaves it pretty wide open not to mention generous in
>> this ("chucks and snowflakes") example. How about Alex Jones, or Glen
>> Beck, or Bill O'Reilly, or Sean Hannity, or Ann Coulter?
>>
>> Are they merely "colorful?" Who on the left is "just as colorful?"

> So you think that there are no equals on the left that are just as
> extreme as those assholes you mentioned above? I can't stand any of
> them. And no I'm not going to point out the lefts colorful people
> either. Thats up to you to admit.

ROTFL Your use of the word "admit" is informative. You say you "can't
stand any of them" yet you've "heard many from the alt.left get just as
colorful." Rob observed that some alt.right people are "truly awful."
Most do not equate "truly awful" with "colorful."

> These type of micro debates are stupid.

Step one, we admitted we were powerless over stupid debates. ;)

> Why are you guys just NOT understanding that I am NOT a supporter of the
> this party *against* another party crap?

I didn't think we were debating who or what you do or don't support.

> If someone points out ONLY left negativity I ask them what about the right?
> If someone only talks about the rights negativity I ask them same thing,
> what about the left?

If you wish to debate who is the most "colorful," you won't get much
action. If you wish to argue about negative bias, "fair and balanced"
etc., (which is where I thought we kinda started) that's a different
ballgame. I offered examples of people that represent the right. If you
feel so strongly that right and left are equal, merely offer up some
examples from the alt.left perspective. I find them vastly different
but I could have missed something.

> Is it NOT hard to understand that someone can actuallybe neutral, hate

> things done on BOTH sides and loathe partisan bullshit and not always assumed
> to be defending any one side?

Hate and loathing are not generally perceived to be "neutral" but I
think I'm beginning to understand (and relate) to your mindset. When
noting the political climate these days I often say "we are Rome" and
any student of history knows that is not a good thing. Not for us, not
for our descendants, not for the planet. This fellow seems to view our
trajectory similarly:

http://tinyurl.com/ltgnek4

> You guys give me a headache.......LMAO......Guess I'm spending more time
> here lately than usual.

The polarity of our collective insights can be addictive. For those
inclined toward introspect there are occasional gifts. :)

[RobD]

The alt.right is, according to those who seem to be involved in it,
white-nationalist/white separatist, anti-Semitic, and somewhat fascist.

(in the strict meaning of the term, "the biggest bundle of sticks." In
fairness, we're all a bit fascist at heart. You can see it in groups of
kids. Eight want to go to the beach, and two want to go to the museum.
The eight insist that "they win," since "majority rules." The two try to
point out that there is a forecast for severe storms and hurricane-level
winds. The eight are having none of that noice. "Majority rules, and
that's *it!*")

I was not really aware of their misogyny until I saw the link Frank posted,
and saw where it speaks of "the manosphere," but that fits, too, if you are
aware of the roots the alt.right has in GamerGate.

Is there a "loony left?"

Sure.

I'm not sure what term they use to describe themselves, but of course they
are folks on the far left political spectrum. That pesky bell-curve shows
up *everywhere.*. And I would not trust folks out on that far end of the
left, any more than I trust the ones on the far right.

But what does the existence of a far-left have to do with what we are
seeing in the alt.right?

It's a little-kid tactic to point to the behavior or misbehavior of others
to try to deflect attention from your own misbehavior, and we see this from
the alt-right as well.

If we're talking about anti-semitism, or white separatism, as I tried to do
at mass one morning, and whether this is compatible with the Catholic
faith, what the hell does the extreme-left have to do with the topic.

The first reading was Isaiah, with the prophet taking Israel to task for
fasting and offering sacrifice, while at the same time practicing
injustice. I was trying to illustrate a modern-day example, and tried the
idea of "Catholics" beginning the Lenten observances WHILE AT THE SAME TIME
involving themselves with the alt.right (white-separatist and
white-nationalist), as in examples such as Steve Bannon. I was trying to
point out this is a foolish past.

One woman was irate. She had never heard of the term "alt.right" before,
but she was FURIOUS that I had not mentioned "the loony left."

Why? What does that have to do with the discussion at hand?

If the "loony left" aligns itself with abortion-on-demand, would that make
the alt.right positions on white-separatism somehow "more acceptable?"
(Scratches head.). I just don't get that.

So I am not clear why you or Joe would want to tell about the left as a
diverting tactic from discussing the alt.right. Perhaps you fear something
dear to you being abandoned. I dunno. That would be for you to say.

But I'll stand by my position. White-separatists and white-nationalists
*are* deplorable. Anti-semites (which is *not* the same as questioning the
policies of the government of Israel) *are* deplorable.

If you think they are *less* deplorable because "well, well, look at the
loony-left!", I have no idea how to respond to that.

"Hey, hey, malnutrition may be a problem, but, LOOK AT MORBID OBESITY! Why
aren't you addressing THAT!?! Why are you talking about the problem of
malnutrition without addressing the existence of fat people?"

(???!)

[JoeRaisin]

Wow... you have some dark issues, man... some dark issues...

Calm down or you'll pop a blood vessel in one of your eyes...

[JoeRaisin]

On 5/22/2017 6:12 AM, RobD wrote:
> So I am not clear why you or Joe would want to tell about the left as a
> diverting tactic from discussing the alt.right. Perhaps you fear something
> dear to you being abandoned. I dunno. That would be for you to say.

LOL - you were the one brought in the "alt." discussion. As far as I
can recall, I haven't mentioned it at all in this thread.

But... hey... as a Hillary supporter the truth gets a bit hard to see,
doesn't it? A couple more posts and I just may be the one who brought
it up by declaring those teachers were fired as part of an Alt-Left
conspiracy. You would have stopped me sooner but were busy dodging
sniper fire. LOL

And don't you go denigrating the ol' "diverting tactic" you describe,
you are likely to irritate Frank, as it's often his only defense.

[JoeRaisin]

You left out the worst of them, when it comes to name calling - Mark
Levin. Though I'm not sure how "colorful" his language is... he usually
just finds some insulting revision of his target's name.

[CW]

Oh, don't be like that, Joe! I thought we were almost very nearly this
close to having a real breakthrough! A meeting of the minds, as it were....

Although, now that I think about it, in order for this to work each
/side/ would have to be at least somewhat agreeable to healing and relating
and all that other touchy/feely shit.

[JoeRaisin]

On 5/21/2017 10:01 PM, Socrates wrote:

BTW... what's a "chuck"?

I threw out the term "snowflake". I used it, I'll own it, and I'll even
stand by it. But I've never heard of a "chuck" unless you are talking
about the TV show, which was an awesome show but doesn't seem to have
any relation to our current discussion.

[JoeRaisin]

I guess I don't see anything funny about cleft pallets or club feet -
and so on, so you're gonna have to take that journey without me.

[CW]

Wait... so now you're re-drawing the line at club feet, cleft palates
'and so on'?

So, that leaves us with just ADHD now? Are you saying that ADHD kids are
the only kids with disabilities we can make fun of? Jokes about kids with
short attention spans... that's *all* we get?

[JoeRaisin]

If that's how black and white the world needs to be for you to cope,
then... sure... that's all the jokes you get.

[RobD]

Waddya call a kid with no arms and no legs, born to a couple of lawyers?

[ByTor]

In article <ofts5j$5ar$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

> If you wish to debate who is the most "colorful," you won't get much
> action.

Maybe not from you, I'm sure there are those here that adhere and ooze
with partisanship willing to contribute to that type of "action."

> If you wish to argue about negative bias, "fair and balanced"
> etc., (which is where I thought we kinda started) that's a different
> ballgame.

This is simply what my intention is, it seems I may have lost myself in
its deliverance.

> Hate and loathing are not generally perceived to be "neutral" but I
> think I'm beginning to understand (and relate) to your mindset. When
> noting the political climate these days I often say "we are Rome" and
> any student of history knows that is not a good thing. Not for us, not
> for our descendants, not for the planet. This fellow seems to view our
> trajectory similarly:
>
> http://tinyurl.com/ltgnek4

I am obviously not that great at transmitting my points. If people want
to take cheap shots at that and offer stupid one line gotcha, getting
the best of nonsense than that's fine, I can admit my weakness I
suppose.

I guess my "mindset" is that all this partisan bullshit is tearing us
down as a country in a BIG way. We see a "press" divided and our own
Congress every day. Seems the *battles* and making each other look bad
is more important than the actual resolving of the issues (sort of what
goes on in here sometimes).

One small example: I watched Trumps speech yesterday in Riyadh.
EXTREMELY important issues that were being addressed. Now some may not
LIKE the person that's addressing them that's fine (I'm not a Trump fan
either), doesn't make it LESS important. I *immedietly* turned to MSNBC,
and what was the FIRST thing a commentator & pundit focused on, WHY
Trump didn't say "radical muslim extremists." Sure, he was a hypocrite
saying it for *effect* in the elections playing off of Americans *fears*
but to say Hillary didn't do the same with *their* sides language as
well telling us what we want to hear is idiocy.

For 8 years FOX and the right trashed Obama at every turn and
congressional Republicans tried to blockade every new policy, and the
left (media, politicians) defended him. Roles are reversed now, and the
SAME nonsense is repeated, the left will blockade new policy and the
media will play its usual role. I often sit back and say what the fuck
is the point in *following* this shit, I can PREDICT exactly what's
going to happen with the media & congress, played out theatrics using
our system as a weapon to distract and play games to benefit a
particular party's power.

[RobD]

Oh.

Just figured something out.

When you asked what a "chuck" was, all I could think of was that it was the
townie insult at St. Meinrad, directed at the seminarians, to imply we were
homosexuals.

(Probably more were than I had any clue about, now that I think back on it.
Proababy more so in Dallas than at St. Meinrad, but there was still a
problem there, I think.)

But looking for something else, I saw how autocorrect had hit me with my
seeing it.

It changed "cucks" to "chucks."

"Cuck" is well defined at this link . . .
http://preview.tinyurl.com/z689hhc

[Ted H]

On Mon, 22 May 2017 11:50:36 -0400,
ByTor <By...@snowdog.com> wrote:
> In article <ofts5j$5ar$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

> > If you wish to argue about negative bias, "fair and balanced"
> > etc., (which is where I thought we kinda started) that's a
> > different ballgame.
>
> This is simply what my intention is, it seems I may have lost
> myself in its deliverance.

[...snip...]

> ...I often sit back and say what the fuck is the point in
> *following* this shit...

I used to ask myself the same, and finally decided there was no
point in it. So I decided to quit the debating society, and for
the most part have stuck to that decision.

--
Ted H.

[Socrates]

On 5/22/2017 8:50 AM, ByTor wrote:

> Socrates wrote:

>> Hate and loathing are not generally perceived to be "neutral" but I
>> think I'm beginning to understand (and relate) to your mindset. When
>> noting the political climate these days I often say "we are Rome" and
>> any student of history knows that is not a good thing. Not for us, not
>> for our descendants, not for the planet. This fellow seems to view our
>> trajectory similarly:
>>
>> http://tinyurl.com/ltgnek4

> I am obviously not that great at transmitting my points. If people want
> to take cheap shots at that and offer stupid one line gotcha, getting
> the best of nonsense than that's fine, I can admit my weakness I
> suppose.
>
> I guess my "mindset" is that all this partisan bullshit is tearing us
> down as a country in a BIG way. We see a "press" divided and our own
> Congress every day. Seems the *battles* and making each other look bad
> is more important than the actual resolving of the issues (sort of what
> goes on in here sometimes).

<snip 4 space>

Continuous division is a law of nature and we, whether we like it or not
are part of that process.

Remember the old saying, "lead, follow, or get out of the way?"

Fiercely independent for as long as I can remember I am not inclined to
lead or follow. But technology has changed the way people communicate,
/everybody/ knows where everybody else stands on every issue and that
has made choice #3 much more challenging and uncommon.

I guess a lot of those middle class parents of the 60's had more on
their minds, more angst, than I thought but their exposure to stimulus
was pretty much limited to the newspaper. TV stations hadn't yet lined
up politically, with one side vs the other. Shit stirring was not yet a
business model. Wannabe commentators weren't selling their souls for
fifteen minutes of fame.

Local stations have been re-running a documentaries on various decades
and I have been kind of watching "The Seventies." I find myself amazed
when I reflect on how much crazy shit has /always/ been the norm, how
much of it I have managed to compartmentalize.

Watergate, Vietnam, Peace with honor (getting out of Vietnam), violent
crimes like the New York 'Son of Sam' murders to the 'Killer Clown' John
Wayne Gacy etc., and that's just the 70's. The 60's featured the
assassination of JFK, the civil rights movement, the Manson family
horror, the Hippy scene, the beginning of Vietnam, etc. Each decade
features it's own insanity and now, we are moving into the /GLOBAL/
chaos of the "New World Order." LOL, tell your kids to fasten their
seat belts and hope that God grants them serenity.

[ByTor]

In article <ofvg79$ioh$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

I think you *nailed* it very adequately. *Shit* stirring has become a
business model and the full *might* of technology is obviously making it
very profitable. But I guess some can say that the technology keeps up
*quickly* and *more* informed, in certain aspects I say NO, especially
when you *limit* yourself to hearing *only* what you want to hear. And
with that observation I think of politicians and the BIGGER media
outlets. Information is manipulated by both, maybe more "distorted" for
effect.

I was born in 1964 and my parents were one of those 1960's middle class
families you mentioned growing up in Brooklyn NY. We had 6 TV channels &
PBS, most of our time was out on the streets playing, and I do remember
the son of sam murders and peoples reactions. But as you said, my kids
are 12 & 19 so yeah I do tell them to fasten their seatbelts. Difference
is I grew up & witness this technological vast difference, they are
already used to it. ;)

[ByTor]

In article <slrnoi67f5...@panix2.panix.com>, the...@panix.com
says...

I hear ya TedH, often ask myself the same thing.

[Socrates]

<snip>

TV has the advantage of pandering to one group. News junkies can go with
the proselytizer that best represents their bias. Our local rag, (that I
delivered back when I was 13) gets letters all the time complaining of
being too left or too right. Cultural clue?

Put yourself in the place of the editor, if he/she /does/ pander to one
side or the other, they lose subscriptions. At least they have a motive
($$$) to /try/ for balance.

I started to use the term Faux Snooze here. Then I wondered if there
was also a derogatory term for MSNBC. Didn't find one but I stumbled
across the Urban Dictionary which kind of underscored my earlier
observations:

MSNBC:
An extremely leftist news network that is biased in all of it reporting
and is reluctant to call out the flaws in the democratic party or even
throw propaganda in their favor. Don't watch it for news but rather to
see how a progressive liberal thinks and how they spin things.

FOX News:
A pseudo-news channel catering to the bottom of the American right-wing
extremist barrel - people who are deathly afraid of anyone and anything
that's even the slightest bit different from them. About as "fair and
balanced" as the Iranian government, which it closely resembles.

[ByTor]

In article <ofvqf7$np3$1...@dont-email.me>, conn...@frontier.com says...

And either channel will *willingly* sell their souls and the *safety* of
citizens just for ratings. What I mean by that, their *dialogue* DOES
matter when it comes to covering stories, *especially* in racial issues.

Only reason why I tune in to each network, including CNN, is to hear
*what* the issues are and what each network fails to report or reports
because of its bias. I have no time for the commentary and pundits
opinions, especially FOX, their *balance* of having guest opposing
opinions is just *theater* and props.

[Eyem]

Kids had to go outside in those days without AC. Today they stay in and the parents can't fuck as much.

[JoeRaisin]

Hang on... I know this one... Does the name depend on the little tyke's
location?

[CW]

What do you have against kids with ADHD, Joe? Do you envy how easy they
have it, nowadays? Why do you single them out, and yet coddle all those
other kids with disabilities? It it because you think they can take a
little teasing? Why don't you see them as overly sensitive too? Snowflakes
in need toughening up?

The fact is you're just another ASFINO (anti-snowflaker in name only).
And I want you to know that I am disgusted with your wishy-washyism.

[CW]

On Mon 22 May 2017 09:01:51a RobD wrote:

> Waddya call a kid with no arms and no legs, born to a couple of lawyers?

Okay, I give up.

(I'll assume it's not Phil, Matt, or Bob....)

[JoeRaisin]

Yep... that's all the jokes you get...

[JoeRaisin]

I know Matt, Bob, Art and Russel... What's Phil?

Lawyers kid got to be Will...

[RobD]

"Sue."

[CW]

On Tue 23 May 2017 06:07:59a JoeRaisin wrote:

> On 5/23/2017 6:59 AM, CW wrote:
>> On Mon 22 May 2017 09:01:51a RobD wrote:
>>
>>> Waddya call a kid with no arms and no legs, born to a couple of
lawyers?
>>
>> Okay, I give up.
>>
>> (I'll assume it's not Phil, Matt, or Bob....)
>>
>
> I know Matt, Bob, Art and Russel...

Ah, yes. Matt & Russel...

What's Phil?

... 'in a hole'

>
> Lawyers kid got to be Will...
>

Uh, no....

[CW]

On Tue 23 May 2017 06:13:57a CW wrote:

> On Tue 23 May 2017 06:07:59a JoeRaisin wrote:

>>
>> I know Matt, Bob, Art and Russel...
>
> Ah, yes. Matt & Russel...
>

Oh, shit! We forgot Skip!!

[JoeRaisin]

Okay... not Will... Apparently I didn't take gender into account.

Never heard Skip either...

[CW]

On Tue 23 May 2017 06:23:28a JoeRaisin wrote:

> On 5/23/2017 7:17 AM, CW wrote:
>> On Tue 23 May 2017 06:13:57a CW wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue 23 May 2017 06:07:59a JoeRaisin wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> I know Matt, Bob, Art and Russel...
>>>
>>> Ah, yes. Matt & Russel...
>>>
>>
>> Oh, shit! We forgot Skip!!
>>
>
> Okay... not Will... Apparently I didn't take gender into account.
>
> Never heard Skip either...
>

water-skiing

[CW]

Hmmm... I had to let this one percolate a bit.

[RobD]

My college roommate is a lawyer. He bet me I couldn't find a lawyer joke
he hadn't heard. So I tried to come up with a new one.