HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Rocknation » Journal
Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next »


Profile Information

Gender: Female
Hometown: New Jersey
Home country: USA
Member since: 2001
Number of posts: 44,197

Journal Archives

Three knockdowns in a round, and the boxing match is over, right?

Not in the Olympics...And note how he keeps trying to grab his opponents legs...



[center][font size="+2"]AND GUESS WHO WAS DECLARED THE WINNER?[/font]


But this story has a happy ending -- the decision was reversed and the referee fired.


Along with my unabashed admiration for roughly sixty minutes, you have a choice of:


Unless you'd rather have something that's actually useful:



Two vast and trunkless legs of stone stand in the desert.

Near them, on the sand, half sunk, a shattered visage lies
whose frown, and wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
tell that its sculptor well those passions read, which yet survive...

And on the pedestal, these words appear:
“My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!”

Nothing beside remains.
Round the decay of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
the lone and level sands stretch far away.

-- Percy Bysshe Shelley (1818)


Forget the goverment infrastructure -- what about the SOCIETAL infrastructure?

"I take umbrage at the suggestion that people don't start and build businesses," Maloney said.

That's NOT what Obama suggested. He suggested that people don't start and build businesses BY THEMSELVES, because it requires the direct or indirect help of OTHER people whether they're members of the government or not -- "SOMEBODY ELSE made that happen."

"I started out with 500 bucks..."

Unless you were born holding it in your hands, Mr. Maloney, you DID NOT "start out" with 500 bucks. "Somebody else" either gave you that money, bequeathed it to you, loaned it to you, or allowed you to earn it. If you found it, it's because "somebody else" lost it -- unless you found "somebody else" to steal it from!

"...and worked with my hands..."

"Somebody else" taught you how to work with your hands (either in person or through instructional materials), and "somebody else" invented and produced whatever tools you used.

"...to afford grad school at night."

"Somebody elses" developed your school, hired the teachers, set the curriculum, and decided to accept you. Not to mention the "somebody elses" who taught you how to read and write, and the "somebody elses" who taught THEM how to read and write -- and teach!

"My wife supported me."

By "supporting" you, do you mean that the "somebody else" you're married to gave you moral support, worked with you at building your business, or got herself hired by "somebody else" to provide a supplementary income?

"Started a little body shop and was able to bring together people, one at a time..."

"Somebody else" helped you obtain your body shop's office space, suppliers, subcontractors, equipment, business cards, insurance, advertising, marketing. When business got so good you that could no longer do all the work yourself, you hired "somebody elses" as employees. And of course, let's not forget the most important "somebody elses" of all -- the people who bought your products and services at a large enough volume that you can consider yourself successful.

And never mind the "somebody elses" in the government who organized the building of the roads -- what if "somebody else" HADN'T invented cars in the first place?


DU pout collection moved to Good Reads


Jeneba Tarmoh On Conceding Final Spot In (2012 US Olympic Team) 100 Meters

Dead Heat For Third Place

(6/23/12): Saturday night’s final of the women’s 100 meters at the 2012 Olympic Trials involved a photo-finish image to determine third place...

The outside camera is traditionally the one used in photo-finish images...(but it)...was inconclusive for determining third place due to athletes’ arms blocking a clear view of their torsos. Torso position is used to determine finishes and times...

Looking at the inside camera images, timers initially...posted Tarmoh as finishing third in unofficial results...The photo-finish image, shot at 3,000-frames-per-second, was then analyzed by timers and referees and unanimously ruled to be a dead heat...Tarmoh and Felix are both officially timed in 11.068 seconds...

Jeneba Tarmoh On Conceding Final Spot In 100 Meters

(Updated 7/4/12):...(A) day after conceding the spot to training partner Allyson Felix, Tarmoh was at peace with her choice not to participate in a runoff to break a third-place tie. She realizes that some will second-guess her decision..."If standing up for what I believe in and not running because I believe I earned that spot...(is) what makes you a quitter then I guess the definition of a quitter is misconstrued nowadays," Tarmoh told The Associated Press...

When she finished the original race, Tarmoh looked up to see her name on the scoreboard in the third spot behind winner Carmelita Jeter and runner-up Tianna Madison. She took a celebratory lap and soaked up the moment, hardly believing she was going to the Olympics in the 100. It was all taken away when she learned officials took a second look at the results and declared a dead heat...

The athletes and their agents met with USATF representatives Sunday, and Felix and Tarmoh announced they wanted settle matters on the track. The other options were a coin flip or one athlete conceding the spot...On Monday, hours before the winner-take-all race was scheduled to be take place and shown on NBC, Tarmoh threw in the towel...

"I worked really, really hard to earn that spot in the 100...It was more than me winning, it was me...cramping up in the middle of practice...throwing up at practices...getting mentally prepared, physically prepared...It was me knowing that when I crossed that finish line, that I put my all on the track...All of a sudden someone's telling me, 'Sorry, we changed our mind. You didn't get third. It's a dead heat.' It was an emotional roller coaster..."

Well, if that's the story, Jeneba, I have bad news for you -- you ARE a quitter.

Remember Paul Hamm, the 2004 Olympics gymnast who won a gold medal because the scores were calculated wrong? The officials said that nothing could be done about it because the rules forbade changing the final results. Hamm has held on to the medal, and I would, too: the OFFICIAL results say that he earned it. It's been suggested he return it anyway -- out of the kindness of his heart or good sportsmanship or something. But as long as the official results say that he won the gold medal, Hamm should keep it. The Olympic scorers made the mistake; THEY'RE the ones who should have to correct it.

Tarmoh's situation is different: this time, the judges DID do the right thing and corrected the official results when it was determined that a mistake had been made. She DIDN'T finish third officially; she tied. And if Tarmoh didn't want to race again (not a bad choice -- they both could have ended up injured), she should have requested the coin toss. Flip-flopping on the runoff makes her look like a bad sport as well as a quitter.

But this story does have a happy ending: Tarmoh is going to the Olympics, anyway, as a member of the 400-meter relay "pool." Here's hoping that she's emotionally strong enough to handle it.



"...Roberts was against the individual mandate when the justices took their initial votes following oral arguments in March. He, along with the other four Republican appointees, believed it was an inappropriate use of Congress’s power to regulate commerce...But the justices did not reach an agreement on how much of the law to strike down...(T)he conservative bloc pushed hard to throw out the entire statute...Roberts...voted to uphold the law...

Roberts did NOT "change his mind" about striking down the law, only the mandate. He upheld the mandate by defining it as a tax -- by CBS's own admission, Roberts was NEVER against the rest of ACA. Apparently leaks to sympathetic media was part of the "conservative bloc's" campaign to get Roberts to "switch views" -- up to and including insinuations about his health by referring to him as "wobbly." Most important, keep in mind that the "sources" for the CBS story could very well be the conservative judges themselves.

Another piece of political mythology is born, like Al Gore's invention of the Internet.


"Does it really matter if an insurance company or the government provides the coverage

if the care is the same?"

The difference with paying the private health industry is that the difference fattens the pockets of its execs, lobbyists, and stockholders while they invent excuses for not covering people (or even paying their employees) so they can turn an even bigger profit.

I don't mind paying for health care, which is why your post does not offend me. However, I do mind paying to further enrich those who do NOT "trickle down" the money via "job creation." I'd rather spend it on preventing EVERYONE from getting sicker than they need to -- and dying sooner than they ought to.


DING DING DING! Spitfire, you're our grand prize winner!

What needed to happen was to make this guy an embarrassment to not only them but to the very concept of professional journalism.

Which Obama also did by refusing to take any additional questions once he was done: the military "if ONE of you has screwed up, then ALL OF YOU have screwed up" principal. Think of all the "evil eyes" Munro must have gotten after that -- even Fox News had to dump on him!

Liberals are at their best when they attack with humor because the Right Wing has no sense of humor.

Click here if you are not familiar with DUer Plaid Adder's superb post on the subject:

...(W)hy is it that so much right-wing political humor just plain doesn't work -- even for its target audience?...I think..(it)...has to do with the basic conflict between comedy and authority...(D)isrespect for authority is the foundation of real comedy...

Mocking the powerful has the positive effect of reminding everyone that though these figures may be powerful, they are not superhuman, and can be resisted/outwitted/defied; it also has the therapeutic effect of validating the anger and pain we feel as we suffer for these people, and reminding us that in fact, it's not us, it's them.

Mocking the vulnerable is just bullying, and all it does is pander to the audience's worst instincts. Right-wing pundits in the main either don't understand this rule, or have a seriously warped understanding of who's vulnerable and who's powerful...

Munro may have thought he was "defying and outwitting the powerful" by condemning the executive order before Obama was done explaining it. But in a textbook example of "seriously warped understanding," Munro ended up "mocking the vulnerable" by accusing Obama of issuing an order that made its recipients "more powerful" than "real" Americans.

This thread has thrived because it strangles Munro on his own rhetoric: you can thrust his arrogant posturing and obnoxious attitude into ANY situation (even the very birth of the universe!) -- and he comes across not as a passionate, professional truth-seeker, but as a self-serving, partisan, overgrown frat brat!


They call him the S-word because it's literally the next best thing to the N-word

Saying that you shouldn't vote for Obama because he's black is not an option because it's as irrational as it is racist.

Saying that you shouldn't vote for Obama because he's a communist is not an option, either -- it's too obvious that you're saying it simply because you can't say that you shouldn't vote for Obama because he's black.

Calling him a socialist, however, splits the difference perfectly -- it gives you all the advantages of calling him both the N-word AND the C-word without actually using them. The S-word provides just the right touch of "reasonable doubt." And the mainstream media is either too chicken or profit-hungry to call anyone it -- after all, controversy sells.

Go to Page: « Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Next »