All Posts (brobison)


(1) 2 3 4 ... 218 »


 
Re: Yet another school massacre post-mortem analysis
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

WVisHome wrote:
Now THIS is a "COMMON SENSE" approach to addressing gun violence.


"I did a lot of research to find organizations in Chicago that take more of a public health approach to the problem of violence," Tanaka said. "Their focus is on addressing some of the problems that contribute to gun violence — poverty, lack of jobs, lack of opportunities, housing, all of the social issues that come up in different communities. A lot of these groups have programs and outreach that have nothing to do with gun legislation but can directly influence gun violence."

Representatives from CeaseFire Illinois, which is the Illinois branch of the Cure Violence Association, Youth Guidance, which creates school-based programs for kids in Chicago, and UCAN, which partners with the Peace Hub to reduce kids' exposure to violence, will attend the free event. Tanaka will lead a 45-minute panel discussion with the organizations and moderate a Q&A afterward.

"I think I had a simplistic view that what these organizations need most is money," Tanaka said. "In talking to them and learning what they do, I realized that with a small amount of time and a small amount of money, they're coming up with programs that create meaningful change in whether young people become involved in violence in the first place."


Bingo! Now we are really wanting to solve something!

The problem is....It is HARD WORK to solve these problems because:

1. It is not a short term fix. The situation we got ourselves in has taken 40 years to get into. I am pretty sure we aren't going to get out in the next 4.
2. There is a vested interest in keeping money, other than government hand-out money, out of the hands of the common folk.
3. It is hard work NOT to be the victim in this society, today when everyone is telling you how unfair it is.

Our legislators are not interested in solving this problem. Our legislators can't even put together a budget for next year. Our legislators can't keep a train of thought going for multiple years in a row.

But banning them black guns that look like military guns because someone shot someone has all the hallmarks of a government program. Easy to legislate, quick and stupid and the masses eat it up because they don't bother to understand the problem they just want to knee jerk like everyone else! All of these just smack Washington D.C. and the current mess.

Posted on: 5/22 3:44 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Conference Armageddon: The Official Conference Speculation Thread
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Read somewhere on the interwebs that Big 12 expansion has only a 15% chance of happening.

That isn't a very good chance.

If expansion doesn't happen I think that spells the death of the Big 12. At the end of the GOR the 10 teams are gobbled up into the the Big 10, PAC-12, SEC and ACC. You guess who goes where. But before you do and we have this WVU inferiority complex remember that Missouri was the pick slightly ahead of WVU the last SEC expansion. In my opinion, we are in this time. I think Texas goes to PAC, Oklahoma goes either PAC. WVU to the SEC.....and....well I don't really care where anyone else goes.

At the end of the day that makes 4 power conferences. 4 spots in the playoffs and the big boys shut out the little boys for good.

I think there is a SLIGHT possibility of SOME SANITY coming to the process and the whole conference thing gets blown up and conferences get aligned by geographic area and instead of 4 power conference there is 1 POWER 1 conference with 4 divisions and they completely break from the bowl scene and leave the bowls to the mid-major tier of teams. I think this is less likely because now there are 4 people making an ungodly amount of money on a game while the other way there would just be one person making an ungodly amount of money on a game. Nowhere in capitalism do I see the elite eliminating the money grab by kicking people out.

Posted on: 5/22 2:50 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: NC passes bill blocking LGBT protections
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
I don't really understand the outrage other than the idea that we want people do do whatever they want.

Once again we have a way to determine which bathroom you should go into. That is defined by the sex organ which nature has given you. If you don't "identify" with that I have no problem with you. If you want to go into another bathroom that is wrong.

Why does it make someone uncomfortable to go into a bathroom for their sex? What are you doing in there? Just go to the bathroom and then leave.

This seems to be an issue that, to me, is as offensive as the religious right dictating religion to me and morality.

First off, if a transgender male to female comes into either bathroom people are going to be uncomfortable. That is on the people who are in the bathroom to deal with that. The specification of having a penis or a vagina is not judgemental at all. It is a simple fact that...1. can be checked and, 2. Can now be controlled.(Have a penis and want to go to the girl's room have it made an "innie" and go to it.

You can not definitively prove or disprove that a given person "identifies" with another gender.

I don't think, if I understand the problem, this is a problem that is part of some larger plan to deny transgender people their rights. They have every right to use the bathroom.

Posted on: 4/24 6:22 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Push for Buctober
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

mrsmountains wrote:
This is awful. Questioned why we kept Locke now I'm convinced


I think you had to give Locke another year. He is something like 2 years removed from an All-Star berth. I think that this is about it for Locke. I foresee him possibly being gone at the trade deadline this year.

It is a little like Charlie Morton.....at times Locke looks unstoppable. At other times he is just average. I suspect he will be sent to the bullpen and he won't fit in there.

Posted on: 4/23 5:54 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Push for Buctober
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

BAssAceNWVa wrote:
9 batters left on base yesterday, 14 today! This team could have been 6-0 out of the gates but have problems cashing in on opportunities. Pitching has been good enough to win as well.


Be prepared to see this a lot more. We are changing our team makeup. We have added a slew of players with high on base percentages. As a result we are going to have, theoretically, more base runners than in years past. The downside is that we are going to strand base runners at a higher rate.

With that being said, Walk yesterday was talking about our batting average with runners in scoring position and stated that through the first 6 games of the season we were about league average for that stat. With the added on base percentage it should mean more runs if we remain average. It will definitely be more frustrating but that is the nature of the beast.

On a different note, I have predicted that this would be the year that Polanco took off. I hope we are seing this so far. He just appears to me to be a beast of a hitter. That swing with the added confidence is exciting!

Posted on: 4/11 4:53 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:
I also don't believe in footing the bill for people to get a free education and paying for someone else's student loans.


Really? Because one of, if not THE, greatest American believed VERY strongly in a free education. There is NO downside in educating your population. NONE.

Most European countries that are kicking our keister in educating its populace is educating their populace through some college for free.

Quote:
I don't make 2 million a year but I don't believe in raising taxes on those that do.


Just curious....how do you feel about taxing a lottery winner? Is that OK? Or can a lottery winner state that they have worked hard for that money?

Posted on: 4/11 4:46 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

MdMounty wrote:
Quote:

A-MAN wrote:

Anyone who honestly believes tax rate at 70% is the right direction has truley lost touch with real world




Bernie's tax rates would max out at 52% and would only impact people making over $10 million. You would have to make more than $231,450 to see a tax increase.

The Burn's Tax Rates


For once MdMounty and I agree.....

Sanders TAX plan is better for this country than any competing tax plans. Cutting/reducing taxes is a fools game and only works for economies that are in decline. I do not believe the US has to be in that mode.

The same is true for companies. Cutting costs in a struggling company normally is another nail in the coffin of said company. Most CEOs take the easy way out to get their bonuses while debilitating companies in the long term. Not to mention that fixing a problem is a whole lot harder than just cutting expenses.

I would assume that Sanders will mess up the revenue by handing out handouts to the poor rather than spurring growth that raises the fortunes of the economically depressed.

Posted on: 4/11 10:41 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: The un-buy-able candidate you're not seeing on TV...
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:
That's some quality reporting there FoxNews! Put a 19 year old on live television and pretend that she is the expert Bernie supporter.


Pretty sure Bernie Sanders demographic is 18-25 year olds so putting a 19 year old on live television WOULD be putting on an expert on Bernie Sanders. Anyone older than 30 is equally likely to vote for Hillary. The older people get the MORE they are likely to vote for Hillary.

Given the fact that 83% of 18-29 year olds vote for Bernie, listening to them might give insight into what makes Bernie a viable candidate. Once you get away from them Hillary pretty much runs the table.


Posted on: 4/11 10:36 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Push for Buctober
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

BAssAceNWVa wrote:
How about those Pirates taking care of business on opening day!!!


A little surprised at Liriano's domination. His last couple of spring training starts were NOT GOOD!

Good to see our new additions stepping in quickly to contribute (Freese and Jaso).

If we can solidify that rotation.....this could be the year.

EDIT: It did seem like he dodged bullets with those walks though. He better work on that control.

Posted on: 4/3 7:10 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Tevin Bush committed or not?
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

westonian420 wrote:
Just wondering why none of the big recruiting sites have him as committed to WVU?


I don't think it is official yet but 247 sports is predicting with 100% certainty that he will be a Mountaineer. With that being said, if he hasn't actually signed a LOI I don't see how you could ever say with any amount of certainty that a person will go one place over another.

EDIT: Sorry....I meant to say with THAT amount of certainty. I mean I would at best say 95%.

Posted on: 3/27 9:25 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: NC passes bill blocking LGBT protections
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Haven't read multiple sources yet to have an educated opinion...but looks bad on first look...

link


Wait! Explain how this is different.

How is it that you can be forced to bake a wedding cake as an individual for a group of people that you don't believe in but make a law saying that you have to go to the bathroom in the boys room if you have a wanger and in the girls room if you have a front butt and suddenly you have carte blanche to nullify contracts. How is that even remotely fair?

Talk about a double standard....and in general I support gay marriage and the right of a person not to serve any customer he doesn't want to serve. But this is even beyond that. You are allowing a region to be hurt financially because of a law?

Its ridiculous!

Posted on: 3/27 9:17 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Veto? LOL
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

WVisHome wrote:


They've really crushed Al-Qaeda and ISIS. How's that working out for Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria, and Libya? Those hilljacks and their guns have been beaten into submission, right?

Isis is actually trained. You are not.


You seriously think that ISIS training beats our military. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

or even me and WVIsHome? I am betting that I have shot more rounds of ammo than the ISIS fighters that are actually in combat.

Oh my god. That is completely laughable. By the way. They are fighting with one of the least accurate rifles in existence against the most accurate....and there are how many of them?

5,000 or 10,0000 Wow. Not only against the US military but Russia and Syria. That is 1,2 in the world and 42.

Talk about people who naively believe crap.

Thanks for the entertainment.

Posted on: 3/22 10:00 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: GMOs?
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:

Whether it happens in a lab or happens in nature. A change is made to the structure of the organism. Is the change good? That question is answered by emotions and concern.



Actually this is not true.

If it happens in nature it is gradual, and whether the change is good is determined by natural selection.

If it happens in a lab often the change is drastic, and whether the change is good is determined by $$$$$.



Winner, winner, chicken dinner! Monsanto DOES NOT CARE one iota about the health of people eating their modified foods. The only consideration is the bottom line. If they can make more money they will crank up the PR department to try to make labeling efforts seem outrageous when folks ask questions. Some of us very naively believe them.

Again...if they are sooooo uncontroversial and safe, why not voluntarily put it on the label? Earlier Brobisn asked "when does the labeling end?"

Answer: when everyone is informed about the content of the food they are eatng.


I actually don't see the problem with knowing what I am eating. Wanting to do otherwise? You're hiding something.


Really? How far should they go? Should Campbell's Soup be forced to label that the tomatoes in their tomato soup may contain tomatos from foreign growers that may have had a problem with E Coli in the past. I would want to know that wouldn't you? They already label that the product contains corn. Assume it is GMO corn or wheat or whatever. Then those companies that think it is bad can label their products with "No GMO". That is a far better solution and a good market solution.

Posted on: 3/22 9:52 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: GMOs?
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

eer_4da_beer wrote:
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:

Whether it happens in a lab or happens in nature. A change is made to the structure of the organism. Is the change good? That question is answered by emotions and concern.



Actually this is not true.

If it happens in nature it is gradual, and whether the change is good is determined by natural selection.

If it happens in a lab often the change is drastic, and whether the change is good is determined by $$$$$.



Winner, winner, chicken dinner! Monsanto DOES NOT CARE one iota about the health of people eating their modified foods. The only consideration is the bottom line. If they can make more money they will crank up the PR department to try to make labeling efforts seem outrageous when folks ask questions. Some of us very naively believe them.

Again...if they are sooooo uncontroversial and safe, why not voluntarily put it on the label? Earlier Brobisn asked "when does the labeling end?"

Answer: when everyone is informed about the content of the food they are eatng.


Seriously?! naively believe them?! You realize that there is actual research on this? You know? The same discipline that you tout as being all knowing when it comes to global warming now suddenly can't determine if the food that goes in your pie hole is safe. Absolutely laughable.

Here is a quote from the UN Food organization:

Quote:
Based on national information from a variety of sources and current scientific knowledge, FAO, WHO and WFP hold the view that the consumption of foods containing GMOs now being provided as food aid in southern Africa is not likely to present human health risk. Therefore, these foods may be eaten. The Organizations confirm that to date they are not
aware of scientifically documented cases in which the consumption of these foods has had negative human health effects.


Of course all of these organizations just assume that food is safe.

At the end of the day Monsanto HAS to have a safe product for its bottom line. It does them no good whatsoever to produce food which is unsafe. That would completely destroy the company.

It is true that Monsanto and others have A LOT invested in GMOs and certainly will fight demonizing it when there is ABSOLUTELY NOT one iota of fact.

So you are OK with labeling vaccines with warnings about autism?

Posted on: 3/22 9:47 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: GMOs?
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

MdMounty wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:

As I said, selective breeding and hybridization IS NOT natural! It has been going on for hundreds of years and can make some pretty radical changes in a short time.


You're changing the argument. At first you said they are the same thing scientifically as GMOs They just aren't. Hybridization CAN occur naturally, but humans have taken it to the nth degree where it would never occur naturally. Selective breeding wouldn't happen naturally either, but both of those methods use the natural process of breeding and combine the complete genome of two individuals just as it happens in nature.

So, it's a helluva lot more natural and a helluva difference between designing something in a lab and manipulating DNA and individual genes. That's completely unnatural.


I am not changing anything. GENETIC MODIFICATION is GENETIC MODIFICATION. Scientifically it DOES NOT MATTER how it happened.

So there is no reason you shouldn't be able to prove the danger of a GMO.....and yet....Nothing.

Whether it happens in a lab or happens in nature. A change is made to the structure of the organism. Is the change good? That question is answered by emotions and concern.

Bananas are to my knowledge not GMOs and yet human selection as reduced the diversity of the banana to an alarming state. If you want to REALLY be concerned about something be concerned about the lack of genetic diversity in our food stocks. Be concerned about how our pesticides are killing the honeybee.

But for the love of God stop acting like GMOs are killing people. They are as safe as the naturally grown foods that they have replaced. As you like to tell Conservatives on here.....so take off your tin foil hats, Monsanto is not doing anything other than selling a product to farmers that the world needs and has a chance to reduce pesticide toxins.

But...this won't happen when we artificially demonize the product with ABSOLUTELY NO scientific evidence. As I say, after GMOs you can go ahead and attack vaccination. At least there was some HOKEY scientific paper about that.

EDIT: Here you go. I will help you out with a link about how bad they are:

https://www.rt.com/usa/toxic-study-gmo-corn-900/

Here you go comrade.

Posted on: 3/21 9:58 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Veto? LOL
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

zwaaa wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:


Last time I checked driving is not named as a right. It is a privilege.


I bet if you checked in January of 1918 you would find that alcohol is illegal...and I bet if you checked again in March of 1933 that would have changed.

Point being some of you have this tendency of assuming the infallibility of the writers of the constitution. You pick an amendment and worship it like a god. Do you know why they call them amendments? BECAUSE THEY AMEND! they fix mistakes and correct omissions and they themselves CAN BE AMENDED.

If the constitution was to intended to be written in stone they would have written it IN STONE. Most things were written in stone back then. It's bothersome when you use "Things in the constitution are sacrosanct!!!!" to defend your own inflexibility.



I think you are reading a whole lot more into my statement than is there. My point was the comparison was not the same. I did not in any way actually state that the amendment was or was not a good amendment or that it was infallible.

I also never said that the Constitution could not be amended. Amend away. I for one would LOVE it if driving a car were listed as a right. Then I could tell my local DMV to F' Off with all of their restrictions that are just stupid. If that were done then his comparison would be valid again.

I don't think anyone is infallible...HOWEVER....I do think that the writers of our Constitution knew a HELL of a lot more about how to protect rights from a despotic government than you or I so I defer to them to enumerate them and I will protect them....even if I don't completely understand why....I give them the benefit of the doubt. You gun haters should try it sometime. It won't hurt anyone and will show how tolerant and loving you are.

EDIT: By the way, I think that was a unanimous decision this week about the fact that guns are not the only protected arms under the Constitution so........

Go ahead and tase your bro.


EDIT EDIT: By the way, have they fixed the second amendment? No? In 200 years they have seen no need to do that? Just checking.

Posted on: 3/21 9:48 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Why did we lose
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
I marked effort by players but to be honest. WVU just played 3 games last week two against top 10 teams and I think that had an effect on this game. I wish that we would have played TCU and bowed out. I also don't know how hard we practiced during the week. I think the players were out of gas against a team that we needed a full tank for.

I have serious concerns about our strength and conditioning program....for all sports. I don't think our athletes have that complete finish that we used to have. I see it in football and I see it in basketball. We have played, in stretches, the best basketball I have seen in my life and then right after that we play like we have never seen a basketball court before. That screams fatigue to me.

Posted on: 3/20 5:57 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Random non-WVU college basketball thread
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

HookEm wrote:
Quote:

wvufan1818 wrote:
There is something about SFA that I hate even more than ND



If SFA was playing Pitt today, who would you root for?


SFA.

The hatred of Pitt, to me, goes clear to the core and obliterates all other annoyances.

Posted on: 3/20 3:09 pm
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Women's Basketball
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

Sane wrote:
Click to enlarge

Open in new window



Seems like a lot of seats for a volleyball facility.


(If anyone wants to see what I'm talking about, the game is on ESPN2 at noon.)


Yep....and apparently they fill it up.

Open in new window



Posted on: 3/20 10:40 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 


 
Re: Women's Basketball
Makin' it Rain
Joined:
8/2/2010 10:50 am
From Canonsburg, PA
Posts: 4358
Quote:

Sane wrote:
Quote:

brobison wrote:
Sad that they are forcing the women to play on a volleyball court! That is total BS! The NCAA should take their hosting away!



Is that what it is? Seriously?

I watched part of yesterday's game and players from both teams seemed like they were trying to play inside the red lines, like they were conditioned that way.

Every once in a while someone would break out of the red box and be wide open for a layup. It was very strange.


Yes. The three lines in the red rectangle are the two volleyball attack lines and the center line is the net. If you are hosting the NCAA playoffs, I would think you could use the regular basketball facility. I would suspect that you could make a fine discrimination lawsuit here I would think.

Posted on: 3/20 12:41 am
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer
 



 Top
(1) 2 3 4 ... 218 »




Login
Username:

Password:

remember me





Copyright © 2004-2011 wemustignitethiscouch.com All Rights Reserved