Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

multiple "Premier" and "Elite" leagues

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
    "Stray Voltage." It is the brainchild of former White House Senior Adviser David Plouffe, whose methods loom large long after his departure. The theory goes like this: Controversy sparks attention, attention provokes conversation, and conversation embeds previously unknown or marginalized ideas in the public consciousness. This happens, Plouffe theorizes, even when—and sometimes especially when—the White House appears defensive, besieged, or off-guard......A top White House adviser told me last week's pay gap dust up was a "perfect" example of stray voltage. This time it was premeditated.

    http://www.nationaljournal.com/all-p...ltage-20140416
    Sometimes the marginal are marginal because they have been marginalized. I'm sure you can find a lot of textbooks that can explain to you how insidiously and systematically marginalization works.

    Comment


      The insular world of academia where Professor Pathetic lives.

      "Two months ago, a freshman women’s studies major who uses the stage name “Belle Knox,” proudly affirmed that she is putting herself through Duke by acting in adult films...The generally insouciant reaction at Duke to the freshman porn star and the shameful rush to judgment eight years ago against three lacrosse players falsely accused of rape have a common root. Both grow out of the tangle of ideas about limitless individual freedom and the pervasiveness of moral and political oppression in America that our elite universities assiduously teach.

      The story line -- rich, white, male athletes at an elite Southern school brutalize a black single mother from the other side of town who’d been forced to work as a stripper and escort to support herself and her children -- confirmed prejudices typical of the media and professoriate. New York Times sports columnist Selena Roberts, and a contingent of Duke professors called the Group of 88, who placed an ad in Duke’s student newspaper, led the pack in adopting venomous tone toward the lacrosse players and exuding contempt for their rights of due process.

      Duke University President Richard Brodhead was vacillating and weak. Although in some public remarks he gave lip service to the presumption of innocence that is a hallmark of justice in a free society, his drastic actions spoke louder than his measured words. Within weeks of the allegation, Brodhead peremptorily canceled the lacrosse season -- the team had hopes of winning the national championship -- and demanded coach Mike Pressler’s resignation, creating the impression that the entire team must have been guilty of something awful.

      A vehement and vocal minority of faculty seized upon grave, if flimsy, accusations to vilify lacrosse players as a whole and portray them as the embodiments of racism, sexism, and class privilege. The vast majority of faculty -- law professor James Coleman was an honorable exception -- remained silent. The administration concentrated on protecting Duke’s brand. Consequently, at Duke fundamental principles of freedom -- the dignity of all individuals, including lacrosse players; equality before the law; due process, especially the presumption of innocence -- lacked a constituency.

      In this respect, Duke is no different from its peers. Instead of teaching the principles that underlie liberal education, elite universities have for many years been force-feeding students a steady diet of the fashionable convention wisdom. Disdainful of dissent, it declares the right of untrammeled individual freedom while proclaiming that women and minorities are pervasively subjugated based on race, class, and sex.

      Such a climate of opinion accounts for a campus culture that blithely accepts and even celebrates a freshman woman starring in hard-core pornography but that demonizes athletes who drank too much at a spring break party, paid women to dance naked and, when Mangum’s partner hurled a racist taunt, replied in kind.

      http://www.realclearpolitics.com/art...sy_122305.html

      Comment


        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        In post #1346 the wingnut cited the same New America Foundation.

        I am not going to argue further with someone who espouses these views..as I have said for a while these people are beneath my contempt and I am not afraid to say it clearly and in my own words.

        the wingnut has been here in his own words "only" this many or that many deaths from right wing terrorists...see this is the meme going around on the cesspool right wing sites like Beitbart dot nutbasket.....there still see a lot of catching up to do until the right wing terrorists catch up to the body count bin laden rang up so they just don't see why we get upset when why of their brethren go on a rampage.

        Women and children as human shields.

        Beneath my contempt.

        The wingnut would run under his bed afraid of you or me just as he fears...well...pretty much everything at one time or another. Whipping up hysteria...all they can do.

        Now Im going to ask the wingnut a favor. How about knocking off your bitter hatred for easter weekend? This godless progressive will have his mind somewhere else.
        You are just too funny, Professor.

        As I said previously, you want to quibble whether the New American Foundation reported 9 or 34 deaths. You want to quibble over the fact that the New American Foundation is partisan or non partisan. But you'll be damned to address the fact that 40000 black youth have been murdered since 1979.

        BTW Professor, you are conversing with more than one "conservative" and confusing the "views" of one to another.

        Comment


          Originally posted by perspective View Post
          Sometimes the marginal are marginal because they have been marginalized. I'm sure you can find a lot of textbooks that can explain to you how insidiously and systematically marginalization works.
          Huh??? Let me repeat for you Perspective.

          It is a pity that politicians prey on press conflict by feeding misleading storylines. "It rewards not those who are right, but those—like the White House press office—who can make their arguments most loudly, most frequently, most obstinately, and with the best backdrop."

          Note the words in quotation, Perspective. Those are the words of Barack Obama from his book, "Audacity of Hope".

          You may be unwilling to read the passages I post here, Perspective, but that is because you are unwilling to open your mind and admit the party your support is just as bad as the party you mock. Politics and religion are two of a kind and you liberals believe in Democrats no differently than a religious zealot believes in God. I on the other hand, am an agnostic who ascribes to the philosophy of Malcolm X that Republicans are wolves and Democrats are foxes. Though politically independent I lean toward the wolves, because I can not tolerate the hypocrisy, lying and manipulation of the Democrat Party.

          As to racism, Perspective, also as Malcolm X pointed out, it is especially used by Democrats to remain in power. We all know racism exists, Perspective, but only one party uses it to remain in power. The two pieces above on "stray voltage" explains why and how. Just amazing to me that a person who has been educated in human psychology doesn't grasp any of these connections.

          Comment


            Anyone who thinks this only applies to Republicans is a fool!

            "The U.S. government does not represent the interests of the majority of the country's citizens, but is instead ruled by those of the rich and powerful, a new study from Princeton and Northwestern universities has concluded.

            After sifting through nearly 1,800 U.S. policies enacted in that period and comparing them to the expressed preferences of average Americans (50th percentile of income), affluent Americans (90th percentile), and large special interests groups, researchers concluded that the U.S. is dominated by its economic elite.The peer-reviewed study, which will be taught at these universities in September, says:

            "The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence."

            Researchers concluded that U.S. government policies rarely align with the preferences of the majority of Americans, but do favour special interests and lobbying organizations: "When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover, because of the strong status quo bias built into the US political system, even when fairly large majorities of Americans favour policy change, they generally do not get it."

            http://www.businessinsider.com/major...igarchy-2014-4

            Comment


              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              You are just too funny, Professor.

              As I said previously, you want to quibble whether the New American Foundation reported 9 or 34 deaths. You want to quibble over the fact that the New American Foundation is partisan or non partisan. But you'll be damned to address the fact that 40000 black youth have been murdered since 1979.

              BTW Professor, you are conversing with more than one "conservative" and confusing the "views" of one to another.
              The only thing the professor wants to quibble about is the fact that right wing terrorists have been killing people in this country and you and some other right wingers enable them from one of your two faces and play three card monte in polite society in your constant effort to take attention away from the fact that the Tea Party, conservatives and white supremacists seem to have a lot of common ground....

              Comment


                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                You are just too funny, Professor.

                As I said previously, you want to quibble whether the New American Foundation reported 9 or 34 deaths. You want to quibble over the fact that the New American Foundation is partisan or non partisan. But you'll be damned to address the fact that 40000 black youth have been murdered since 1979.
                That's a valid point when all you conservative second amendment loonies get behind serious gun control but until you do that you should probably save that kind of point for your conservative candyland fantasy games.

                Comment


                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  The insular world of academia where Professor Pathetic lives.
                  Fourteen years since I have been in academia. Winguts....just wrong about everything....even things that a little reading comprehension would fix.

                  LMAO.

                  Sorry wingnuts that I cannot be one of the cartoon characters that you have created while you cowards sit at home afraid of the world. The kind of weakness and fear that drive your attitudes do not allow for someone like me.

                  Born and raised POOR.
                  Got an education through sweat and labor. Worked many blue collar wage jobs.
                  Over ten years in academia but never as a tenured track professor....oops...
                  Very aware of the plight of afdjunct faculty thanks. There's a story there for research faculty too.
                  As many years employed in the private sector.
                  Been self-employed.
                  Earned my salary through a competitive process....no performance no salary no roof over my head.
                  Seen my share of discrimination on my way up thanks.

                  I'm your worst nightmare....I've walked the halls of the Ivy's AND scrubbed out the insides of boilers while breathing asbestos dust when I was young back in Appalachia.

                  Among other things....

                  So understand that I am your worst nightmare because BOTH my personal experience AND my obvious ability to deal with ...those nasty things called facts and data....lead me to reject the very way you frame everything out of your mouth.

                  But do keep getting even the most basic facts wrong and insisting on your "facts" because all of the kids who read this get it. That's why I'm here don't you know....I'm not trying to convince you wingnuts of anything....I am giving you an opportunity to show yourselves so that the kids and people who don't understand you as well as I do can make up their own minds.

                  Thanks again. You guys always play right into my hands. maybe if a few more of you show up like in the good old Scott Brown fanboy days on this board, I might not be so bored with the bitter ender here.

                  Comment


                    Since it is Good Friday I was wondering if any of you thoughtful conservatives....who have been telling me for years that we are a Christian society etc etc etc can explain to me why conservative thought leaders have been attacking Pope Francis with the same tired old words...Marxist, communist, etc....that wingnuts seem to throw at anyone who might adopt a philosophical stance that differs from their own.

                    Can any of you powdered wig wearing dandies muster an explanation? Is the Catholic brand of Christianity as espoused by its titular head considered outside the type of "Christianity" that conservatives bluster about all the time?

                    I think Good Friday is an appropriate time to consider what Pope Francis had to say in his first encyclical. An encyclical is a letter sent to all Bishops.

                    "It is no longer simply about exploitation and oppression, but something new," the pontiff wrote in the 85-page document. "Exclusion ultimately has to do with what it means to be a part of the society in which we live; those excluded are no longer society’s underside or its fringes or its disenfranchised – they are no longer even a part of it. The excluded are not the 'exploited' but the outcast, the 'leftovers'.
                    and

                    “In this context, some people continue to defend trickle-down theories which assume that economic growth, encouraged by a free market, will inevitably succeed in bringing about greater justice and inclusiveness in the world. This opinion, which has never been confirmed by the facts, expresses a crude and naïve trust in the goodness of those wielding economic power and in the sacralized workings of the prevailing economic system. Meanwhile, the excluded are still waiting.”
                    You wingnuts KNOW he was talking right at YOU because as you are well aware Republicans starting crying about this like babies who had been stripped of their binkies.

                    See one of the conservative "binkies" is being able to EXPLOIT religion. Like one of you wingnuts said here a while back in an unguarded moment "not very religious" even though he had been hiding behind "religion" like a scared little boy hiding behind his mom's skirt.

                    It actually brought me further back into the fold as a Catholic when i saw the wingnuts attack Pope Francis. Anyone who drives wingnuts to the level of apoplexy he is is someone I can find a lot of common ground with.

                    So I guess I should thank you wingnuts.

                    Comment


                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      Huh??? Let me repeat for you Perspective.

                      It is a pity that politicians prey on press conflict by feeding misleading storylines. "It rewards not those who are right, but those—like the White House press office—who can make their arguments most loudly, most frequently, most obstinately, and with the best backdrop."

                      Note the words in quotation, Perspective. Those are the words of Barack Obama from his book, "Audacity of Hope".

                      You may be unwilling to read the passages I post here, Perspective, but that is because you are unwilling to open your mind and admit the party your support is just as bad as the party you mock. Politics and religion are two of a kind and you liberals believe in Democrats no differently than a religious zealot believes in God. I on the other hand, am an agnostic who ascribes to the philosophy of Malcolm X that Republicans are wolves and Democrats are foxes. Though politically independent I lean toward the wolves, because I can not tolerate the hypocrisy, lying and manipulation of the Democrat Party.

                      As to racism, Perspective, also as Malcolm X pointed out, it is especially used by Democrats to remain in power. We all know racism exists, Perspective, but only one party uses it to remain in power. The two pieces above on "stray voltage" explains why and how. Just amazing to me that a person who has been educated in human psychology doesn't grasp any of these connections.
                      Let me simplify my position for you, sir.

                      I don't agree with you that Republicans are not hypocritical, manipulative, sneaky, obsessed with bringing certain liberals down at all costs, and massively strategic..... BUT, if I did buy your argument, I would say this....

                      I'm not going to side with the Klansman just because he is not hypocritical in his beliefs and actions (at least when the robe is on). Yes, I'd rather side with the fellow who uses criticizing the Klansman as part of his path in getting elected. Aside from the latter's motives, at least he is voting in the right direction. Or, put another way, stop the blatant racism and the other nonsense with your favored "wolves" and then the "foxes" won't have that ammunition. Your arguments strike me as very similar to the arguments that those who respond to attacks against particular soccer clubs are really the ones causing the negative publicity and therefore most blameworthy while those instigating to begin with are held harmless. Bizarre logic.

                      Comment


                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        That's a valid point when all you conservative second amendment loonies get behind serious gun control but until you do that you should probably save that kind of point for your conservative candyland fantasy games.
                        Changing the subject again, Professor? Now it's gun control? Well, let's examine that point as regards black on black violence. Illinois has among the most stringent gun laws in the country and yet Chicago, as of 2012, had the highest homicide rate in the country, the vast majority of which was black on black. The significance of the Chicago homicide rate that year (500+) was that the cities of New York and Los Angeles, both with larger populations, had significantly lower homicide rates (New York 333, Los Angeles 250). For the same period of time as the war in Afghanistan, if you lived in Chicago, you had more than double the chance of being killed by gunfire in Chicago than if you were a soldier in Afghanistan exposed to not only gunfire, but roadside bombs. But guess what, Professor. The homicide rates in Chicago are decreasing, but not because of additional gun laws, but because of increased policing and programs geared toward youth.

                        http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/0...n_4531328.html

                        Whether we are speaking to the dissolution of the black family or the fact that we have so many seriously mentally ill out on the streets, the problem with you liberals is that you have a one size fits all mentality that would apply laws to law abiding gun owners because of the problems that YOUR liberal policies have created in society.

                        Comment


                          And keeping with my themes that liberals are hypocrites, comes this story:

                          George Soros-funded*Media Matters for America, a far-left progressive group that has as one of their top priorities to attack FOX News, is taking a very unprogressive-like stance on labor unions. While MMFA has in the past taken a strong stance against secret ballot union elections, especially if it involved an opportunity to attack the GOP and conservatives, when it comes to their organization, they are not only in support of the secret ballot; they are forcing it.*The*Washington Free Beacon* reported that Maryland based SEIU Local 500 filed papers to unionize at MMFA with the National Labor Relations Board. As workers prepare to vote on whether to join SEIU, George Soros’s Media Matters has told them the voting must take place by secret ballot.

                          Comment


                            Dear Folks,

                            Google the wingnuts "remarks".....they were lifted word for word from the "Tea Party News Network"

                            seriously

                            http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/17/irony...-unionization/

                            You get an F wingnut. Try again.

                            BTW heard that Republicans have used you dopes for everything they can and are now kicking you out to the street for your walk of shame..,..lol

                            Chamber of Commerce has ads up attacking Tea Party candidates. Hand that fed you now biting you? Think this is because your "movement" has been a success?

                            http://live.wsj.com/video/jerry-seib...2-195ECEB54E94

                            Comment


                              The story is the story obviously professor Pathetic does not like the story. What was that rule # again?? Didn'y you just post a bunch of nonsense with no link?? pot kettle

                              Comment


                                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                                Since it is Good Friday I was wondering if any of you thoughtful conservatives....who have been telling me for years that we are a Christian society etc etc etc can explain to me why conservative thought leaders have been attacking Pope Francis with the same tired old words...Marxist, communist, etc....that wingnuts seem to throw at anyone who might adopt a philosophical stance that differs from their own.

                                Can any of you powdered wig wearing dandies muster an explanation? Is the Catholic brand of Christianity as espoused by its titular head considered outside the type of "Christianity" that conservatives bluster about all the time?

                                I think Good Friday is an appropriate time to consider what Pope Francis had to say in his first encyclical. An encyclical is a letter sent to all Bishops.



                                and



                                You wingnuts KNOW he was talking right at YOU because as you are well aware Republicans starting crying about this like babies who had been stripped of their binkies.

                                See one of the conservative "binkies" is being able to EXPLOIT religion. Like one of you wingnuts said here a while back in an unguarded moment "not very religious" even though he had been hiding behind "religion" like a scared little boy hiding behind his mom's skirt.

                                It actually brought me further back into the fold as a Catholic when i saw the wingnuts attack Pope Francis. Anyone who drives wingnuts to the level of apoplexy he is is someone I can find a lot of common ground with.

                                So I guess I should thank you wingnuts.
                                When did you convert from Judaism to Catholicism?

                                No conservatives I know are attacking Pope Francis. They may disagree with him on comments he made about capitalism, but overall conservatives are generally supportive of the new pope. But don't let thst get in the way of your agenda to paint conservatives as close minded bigots.

                                And please feel free to continue your exaggerations to make your point you could not otherwise make. It proves continued support of my point on liberals and "StrayVoltage" in the process. :D

                                "Stray Voltage..is the brainchild of former White House Senior Adviser David Plouffe...The theory goes like this: Controversy sparks attention, attention provokes conversation, and conversation embeds previously unknown or marginalized ideas in the public consciousness.*

                                Comment

                                Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                                Auto-Saved
                                x
                                Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                                x
                                Working...
                                X