kvnchrist

What provides a more productive builder of charactor? Popularity or obscurity. I know I was a loner and an outsider, when I was growing up. I learned very quickly just how differently those who stood out and those who didn't where treated. I was wondering what you guys thought of these two social extreams and if either was best suited for chactor building.

Just an observation.

Racism has become an instution and a way of life for those who make claims for or against it, while they look high and low for any situation which they can exploit. It's more important for such people to be seen performing an activity than actually confronting the attitude.

Role models are the parents or lack of them. The rest is just dreams and fixations.

I agree with you, up to the first coma. Celebrities , in spite of their shallowness and double standard fraught hypocrisy are the apple of the MSM eye......ratings, exposure, political allegiance all figure in, Thor....Our understanding of JUST how our climate actually functions over time is still in it's infancy. We have only tracked temperature data for about 200 years (and that's being generous as far as accuracy) satellite data for about 40 years (again, being generous) Many scientist believe that this planet is 4.5 BILLION years old. Now, my question is just how long must you make that 4.5 billion line just to make the 200 year line show up? Hence, they rely on proxy data, such as ice cores and tree rings, which have not validated the anthropogenic angle sufficiently.....even to a plunger like me. :smile: Where do you think these issues are brought into the public eye? The media does that. They are also the ones that bring to our attention what these people say and do. Heck we even have Entertainment Weekly, so those without enough bussiness of their own to occupy their time can drool and slobber at the exploits of those drama queens. They play to the media, not us and the media highlights what they think will draw the most contrivercy. How can you say the celebrities ochestrates anything, when it is their promoters who set the stage for them and the media holds the microphone. All the world is a stage and we are the players. These people are quite apt at what they do and that is act and the media gives them the stage. I think I heard something about the use of ice cores, drilled from the polar ice caps that are said to give an inite to the weather of the past. Then I've also heard the use of tree rings used for the same thing. I'm sure the Earth itself could be used as a marker for the weather paterns of the past. Like I've said, I'm uneducacted in this matter, but I think the data is out there for those who truly want to find it. The issue is do these people what data to support the truth or a preconceived notion? Whatever the truth be, I hope someday to find out what it is outside the political arrena, because the debait on this issue has gotten so personal and so toxic that it has lost it's relivancy in the cloud of personalities. It's no longer about the climate. It's about the left, the right and the money between to two sides.

Please don't assume you know my state of mind when I post anything. I posted this as a responce to people who are really concerned about the situation as a whole with the reliablity of the government. P.S. Maybe you missed this part of the artical. Appearantly he did inform the staff and the information was not taken into account. As far as anyplace being qoute/unqoute troubled by this, death is more than just troubling, but I geuss the distance grants some people the right to be flipant about such things.

I just got a phone call from my daughter down in san Antonio, Tx. It seems the staff of a hospital misdiagnosed an Ebola patiant and sent him home with some low level pharmaceuticals for something far less dangerious, even after he said he'd recently visted an African nation. http://news.yahoo.com/ebola-patient-mishap-prompts-cdc-alert-to-hospitals-205334851.html Now her family on her moms side, who live around the Dallas area are asking if they could come down to her place for a few weeks. I very rarely go ape about things that could easily be prevented, but I tend to take issue with those people whose job it is to care for the sick and injured fail so completely after they had been informed f the posibility. How far should the government go to protect our citizens from deadly diseases and how far would you go to asure your own health and that of your loved ones? Would you stock up on food a water suplies in order to be able to close yourself off from society?

Perception is 9/10 of reality. As long as they are doing something they will be aplauded by those who think any effort, no matter how fruitless, is a good thing. Look at how many people make videos to qoute/unqoute raise awearness of issues that we've been awear of for decades. Activism has become a comodity, bought and traded by the politically elite in this country. Look at the Occupy Wallstreet movement and what it accomplished. Look at the Tea Party and see much the same thing. Look at how influential third party candidates are. Has anything really changed, oher than the slight nudge they have made in the political spectrum at the height of their popularity. How quickly does the fervor fade? We, in this country are sensation seaking drama queens that gravitate to the newest shiny object to creep into our mundane lives, as we search for that elusive feeling we get when we can justify our own ideals. We are so busy trying to pat ourselves on our own backs to really look at those who are driving the train of government off the cliff we have convenced ourselves the oher guy created. If we scrutinized ourselves and those who claim to speak for us as much as we do those that do the same in opposition to ourselves, would we even be on this train or heading in the dirrection we are at present.

This is a domestic president. He has tried to remove the US from the worlds stage and fix whathe thinks needs fixing. If that means manipulating informatioin, I don't think he would be the first president to do that. It's mind over matter. They don't mind and we don't matter.

I don't consider a celebrity to be anything more than a person with a job. Politicans are the same way. The popularity of these people is in the eye of the veiwer. They are only as relivant as the veiwer perceives them to be and to speaking of them as anything extraordinary is to grant them the persona they may not deserve. Ask yourself this. If these celebrities weren't sensationalized by the media, would they be of any significance at all? If people had a more accurate perception of their own self image, would these people have as many followers of social media? If people weren't so lazy as to gooestep after the social issue of the day and actually took the time to find their own answers, would these celebrities have any influence at all in this world? It's the media that conducts this orchestra of ignorance, not the celebrities. This has been the case since Fatty Arbuckel and will go on as long as the people stnd for it and I don't see many roaring for change. They'd rather listen to two degenerates beat the crap out of eachother on Jerry Springer or play the newest game than pay attention to what is actually happening in the real world.

If they didn't denigrate us, and, they actually walked their lofty talk, I would agree with you. Till then, i must respectfully disagree. If you can't lead by example, you simply cannot garner the respect needed to lead in the first place. Let's face it, the only reason that those folks (Gore and Decaprio) are out there is because of self-righteousness and the fact that they consider their opinion somehow more important than those of us 'regular' folks. An agenda driven ex-politician and a hollywood celebutard rant on an absolutely uneducated spiel about climate and I'm supposed to take their word for it?? Why? Because of their "status"? The fact that they actually believe that disgusts me....Just my opinion. I don't think I've ever heard either of these two denigrate anyone, simply because they are public figures and need to appeal to the largest audiance. I think to brunt of those who look down on those who think differently are those who have the least to loose by doing so. Those nameless and faceless people who clamer into youtube and social media trying to capture their 15 seconds of fame from those eaqually irrelevant, who are ready, willing and able to suport this adolscent behavior. As far as celebrities, we know absolutly nothing about their real feelings on any event, except what they've spoken about and even then we don't know truely how sincere they are. The idea that they think their opinion carrys more weight than ours is, I think is more a testimony of what an observer thinks of them more than what we actually know of any of them. If they are hyprocrites then they are not alone in this world. I know that I've fallen into that trap atleast once in my life. To say that we don't do this or that is to not understand truly how shortsighted we are as human beings. Life is not over until it is done and to say anyone is above hypocracy is to say that we remember everything we've done from the day we were born and know everything we will do before we leave this world. I am a hypocrite, a liar, a theif, an abuser, a drunk, a drug addict and a hopeless dreamer that somewhere in my head has created the desire that one day we will all be as kind to everyone as we think we deserve. Until that time I will struggle through my faults and misgivings trying to make amends for the wrong I've done to others and hope that others will follow. Right now I'm struggling with not taking the actions of others personally. I think I've I can master that I can stop reacting in kind and learn to actual love those who hate me, for not being more like them.

We just witnessed it in NYC last weekend!! All of those climate hippies who drive their SUV's to work and, to the big climate protest, and, pound those cell phones to the tune of Leanardo Decrapioe and Al prostitute....Both of whom burn more carbon in one day than your entire family (if average) will burn in a month.....hell... maybe a year! Not to mention all of that garbage those " clean the planet of all human excess" freaks left. Gawd!! Not a one of them actually walks their lofty talk...Never...ever ever. I don't see any reason to denigrate peoples names in any case. I'm sure these people are very popular in their own circles and that, most likely is the reason they support something that is popular there. It's really hard to tell who believes what today and who is just going through the motions to stay relivant. As for celebrities, they are who they are and part of their carreer is to keep people interested in them. These people squawk about the media intruding in their lives, but I think they would die a very slow death if the media really took them up on what they claim to want the most.

I hate when politics get mixed up with anything. The purity level goes to hell and when the quality of the product doesn't reflect the reports, it's not long before the reports are no longer sought. It doesn't matter how any of this started, It matters if it has legs and if it does and there is a concentrated effort to quash it, those doing the quashing risk their credibility if the truth comes out. I don't know anything about this and hardly care. I don't look to anything more than the company and the advertisement when I purchase something. If it works for me, then it works. I'll suggest it to others, but I won't promote it to anyone. There are too many tastes out there for me to think everyone likes what I like in the same ferocity. If this topic turns out to be true and there is corruption in the gaming world, it wouldn't surprise me. With so much money changing hands there has to be someone climbing over somone else and for that matter, how do we know the woman's product isn't worth it.

Like I've said before. I don't know crap about global Warming, but I wouldn't listen to this ass wipe If he paid me. There are ways of talking to peple and ways not to. This is nothing more than someone who wants the adolescent smart asses to give him a high five by making fun of them, not someone who legitimately wants to debunk anything. If I was so certain about something as drastic as I've heard it is to people such as this, I would not engage in practices that would push people away from my message by disrespecting those that disagree, but I guess he has a target audience to entertain.

I will say this once and then I'm through discussing others behavior. I am not so perfect that I am above anyone, but this sort of stuff is unproductive at the very least. Please do not bring Stalin into a conversation and make statements about him then talk about us discussing the man as a derailment of the topic. Also, instead of defending your position about the man you are tossing books at us to read as if there is no history we can call upon. Books can sometimes reflect more on their authors than the subject matter. It's all in what they emphasize. Truth is one thing that can be altered by the spirit. The trick of it is not knowing the truth before it is found. If you do then you stop looking for truth before it's time and start looking for facts to justify that set of truth. No matter how thin it is.

Stalin was as crazy as Hitler as far as wiping people out. He just did it to his own people, so no one outside there really cared. Stain did nothing without a reason and the backing of the Israel state was not to benefit anyone except him. It got England out of the Mideast and prevented America from taking it's place. Stalin didn't give a crap about anything else. I doubt very seriously wither any other people other than the Israelites cared anything about them having a state. They just went through a war and wanted to clean up the pieces. No European country had the power to control even their own country, let alone continue colonization of the Middle East. England had been promising to back a Jewish state since before WWI and had reneged every time. They were as exhausted as the rest of the European powers and needed an out. This idea that any country was completely behind Israel is crazy. They wanted a quick fix for an issue and did much the same as they did after WWI by simply doing something, no matter what the indigenous population wanted and then they retired to lick their wounds. Obviously you know very little about Josef Stalin.Next to nothing. Be sure in which direction you speak when you talk of ignorance. It might be directly into a mirror. If you have something to say about someones opinion then have something to replace it with and we will discuss it. If not then it's simple banter and not worth me discussing. There is a history that goes with this man and i've ready some of his. What do you have to refute my opinion.

Stalin was as crazy as Hitler as far as wiping people out. He just did it to his own people, so no one outside there really cared. Stain did nothing without a reason and the backing of the Israel state was not to benefit anyone except him. It got England out of the Mideast and prevented America from taking it's place. Stalin didn't give a crap about anything else. I doubt very seriously wither any other people other than the Israelites cared anything about them having a state. They just went through a war and wanted to clean up the pieces. No European country had the power to control even their own country, let alone continue colonization of the Middle East. England had been promising to back a Jewish state since before WWI and had reneged every time. They were as exhausted as the rest of the European powers and needed an out. This idea that any country was completely behind Israel is crazy. They wanted a quick fix for an issue and did much the same as they did after WWI by simply doing something, no matter what the indigenous population wanted and then they retired to lick their wounds.

Why do so many people think that Hitler was a man and not an event is beyond me. Could the man even have been more than a memory to his closest friends and family, If It had not been the sequence of events that shaped the world for his arrival?

Commenting on the actions of some without providing a direct connection between the action and the producer of that action is not an attack on anyone, The idea of debating is transferring information and personal attacks close off more avenues than they open. Some people might be uninformed or simply devoid of any knowledge in those areas and simple respect opens up a dialog between everyone.

Yes, but what is the upside to all of this. Anger spreading misery to what gain? Does it lead to anything beneficial to anyone, even the perpetrator? Situations like these seem to be more about a person, either discovering or concealing something about themselves more than those the direct their anger upon. Where would all this come from and how could someone deal with these internal struggles in a way that would allow them to grew? I know that there are some that have a set ideal about an area of experience, but that should not bring them to anger unless they also have a prejudicial view of those who call that experience into question. It would seem to me that those who carry something like that around them have a burden to much for them to carry. That would seem to me to be a very alone person. I wonder how many loners do we have here and if these people are more alone than those of us who are loners and can still communicate between each other without offense.

Could someone please tell me the upside of commenting on each other instead of the topic at hand? I've never been able to wrap my mind around this, unless the persons where so far of track that they were detracting from the topic instead of adding to it. Is there some reason why it is somehow wrong to agree with each other or disagreeing with others without someone coming in an making derogatory remarks about this and that group. I have heard of something called "Group think" which to me is simply agreeing with those people are idealistically alighned with, but is it automatically true that these very people stop thinking as individuals if they agree with each other on many things. IF one supports another's opinion with their own opinion, does that somehow invalidate those opinions or the people who make them? As I've stated before, I don't know diddly about certain subjects that have been discussed here, but what is ever learned from people thumbing their nose at others for not arising to some level of standards that those who make them, almost assuredly haven't always kept? I'm painfully aware of my own level of hypocrisy in this case, so I'm not talking down to anyone. I'm simply asking why?

Shouldn't is a very big word when one is incapable of purchasing reality. I've used it many times in my frustration. Justice many times means just+us!

I don't know anything about this. I'm not educated enough to make an informed comment on any of it, but when I see people in the same fields as those who are proponents of global warming getting threatened with loosing their credentials for opposing the theory, I sense that somethings not right. When people are so invested in this that they want to utterly destroy anyone who voices concerns about it are acting out of raw emotions and that does bode well with my idea of science. Science to me is the ultimate form of the investigation of the real world. The findings should not be a political volleyball pushed by people who have their own agendas and there should not be a financial reward for finding a possibility. This is what I think is driving the entire drama and feeding the frenzy. The notion that both sides have a financial stake in the outcome. As for now, I think the situation is as toxic as the proponents of this theory think Global Warming is and I think the media has made it so for their own financial gain. I think we should look more closely at that before heading out to throw curses at the opposition.

I don't know about this. It would seem to me that people need to be responsible for their own actions and should be given a chance to straighten up, if they screw up. I mean, what's the percentage of players that do this stuff anyway? Those that do this stuff should be suspended until an investigation could get to the truth and If they were found guilty they should be put on leave for a year so they can get help. If they don't or they act out again they are through. As for the commissioner, I think he is doing what every other commissioner has done in the past. Listen to the prevailing winds and react according to what the owners want. They are the ones that are really in charge in the first place. The two things that drive them are money and winning. If you screw with either of those, you will get their attention and this is what you see happening now. The media is nothing more than a reflection of those they are trying to appease. People want something to satiate their desire for drama and the media satisfies these needs by a healthy dose of demonetization and deviltry. If the media went after the responsible parties, the story would be cut and dry and be old and stale before the week was out. That doesn't sell papers or get ratings. I wonder if something like this happened to anyone within their organization, would they cover it in the same dogged manner as they do these celebrities. As for Sarah Palin, I think the media buz about this Beverly Hillbillies reject has about ran it's course. Let granny and her moonshine still head off into the same oblivion she came from. The Texas Tea turned into anal seepage soon after the rest of the country rejected her and she's been living far too long on the hype of her hype.

I'm more worried about the mindset of those who think that endurance makes you strong in the face of abuse. The idea of accepting abuse as a part of life as a functional member of society and that it is someones debt to society to continually support this behavior. You can endure anything until it kills you, but if you endure abuse for someone else is that you being a victim of said abuse or a champion of something else. I hear about wemen staying in an abusive relationship for their kids, but is doing that not teaching those kids that abusive conduct is acceptable behavior? Are children seeing this abuse even through they are not physically struck be the abuse., victimized by it? How will these kids incorporate the lessens learned by what they see into their own lives as an adult?