Soda Wars: New York by Kwicko

"We'll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false." -- William Casey, Reagan's presidential campaign manager & CIA Director (from first staff meeting in 1981)

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by m52nickerson:
You should know that no one is defending this Rappy.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

Maybe not on THIS particular issue, but some sure do seem to want to make a bogie man out of 'marketing', and the evils of trying to reach customers.

My point is that it's not something sinister or to be feared. Understood, perhaps, but not scorned. It's information.

And putting a 'pin prick' in the profit of beverage companies isn't the goal here, is it ? I thought it was to alert folks that drinking too much soda is bad for them. So, which is it ?

If you allow the govt to start making these decisions for you, what next ? This is beyond the proper function of govt. Period.

But you're completely comfortable with government telling you who you can and can't marry, aren't you?

Or telling you whether or not you are required to give birth to your rapist's baby.

Yeah, you're totally good with government doing those things for you.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 3:42 PM

If we're doing quotes instead of writing our own thoughts, here's a good one.

"An entire generation pumping gas, waiting tables; slaves with white collars. Advertising has us chasing cars and clothes, working jobs we hate so we can buy shit we don't need. We're the middle children of history, man. No purpose or place. We have no Great War. No Great Depression. Our Great War's a spiritual war... our Great Depression is our lives. We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact. And we're very, very pissed off.

You're not your job. You're not how much money you have in the bank. You're not the car you drive. You're not the contents of your wallet. You're not your fucking khakis. You're the all-singing, all-dancing crap of the world.

We're consumers. We are by-products of a lifestyle obsession. Murder, crime, poverty, these things don't concern me. What concerns me are celebrity magazines, television with 500 channels, some guy's name on my underwear. Rogaine, Viagra, Olestra... "
Fight Club

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:00 PM

An article from the Guardian, which says a lot of interesting things, and to which I probably agree.

New York Mayor Bloomberg v Big Soda

The real problem with Bloomberg's ban is not paternalism, but whether it can be effective against a powerful food industry lobby

Bettina Elias Siegel

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has made headlines by announcing his administration's plan to ban the sale of sugary drinks offered in containers larger than 16 ounces. The proposed "large soda" ban would affect food service establishments like restaurants, movie theaters and street vendors, but would not affect grocery or convenience stores. (Diet sodas, fruit juices, milk-based drinks and alcoholic beverages would be exempted.)

The move, which would take effect next March, falls under the purview of the city's health department. It therefore seems unlikely to require any outside approval beyond its likely passage by the city's Board of Health.

As a writer who blogs daily about kids and food, I'm deeply immersed in the issue of childhood obesity and its related ills. I've reported on children needing weight-related knee replacements and new research indicating that diabetes, which is on the rise among teens, may be a much more pernicious illness in pediatric patients than in adults. I also know that excess sugar consumption harms the health of all children, even those who are not overweight. So you might assume I'd welcome Bloomberg's large-sized soda ban with great enthusiasm.

Instead, I feel ambivalent about it.

Don't get me wrong: I'm no fan of the soda industry (one that rightly has been compared to Big Tobacco) and while some commentators are dubious, I accept the proposition that the consumption of sugary beverages, particularly soda, has been a major driver of our current obesity and health crisis. I support the idea of a soda tax; I even approved of a more controversial proposal (also Bloomberg's), which would have exempted soda purchases from the food stamps program.

I stand behind any measures to curb the advertising of soda to children, including the intrusion of beverage companies into schools through bus advertising, vending machines and support of athletic programs. I'd even be OK with sticking a warning label on non-nutritive sugary beverages. In short, I have absolutely no problem with public policies that encourage health-promoting behavior and disincentives which lead people to avoid harmful behavior.

But forbidding people outright to buy the size of soda they desire strikes me as quite paternalistic and intrusive and – if my Twitter feed is any gauge of public sentiment – likely to fuel resentment. And while it's true that Bloomberg's other, similarly coercive health measure – the banning of smoking in restaurants – was controversial when announced but is now widely accepted, one key difference is that smoking in restaurants not only adversely affects the smoker, but also the non-smokers around him. With soda, though, there is no immediate harm to bystanders that might otherwise justify the proposal in the minds of many New Yorkers.

There may also be problems implementing the ban. First, one clear flaw is that at fast food establishments and other venues where free refills are the norm, nothing in the proposal would prevent customers from bypassing the soda limit by simply refilling their 16-ounce cup. Similarly, convenience stores like 7-Eleven (which are currently expanding in New York City) might be exempt from the ban, ironically preserving the most iconic super-sized sugary drink of them all: the Big Gulp.

Second, there's the possibility that the ban will actually create the perverse economic result of normal soda drinkers subsidizing the excess soda-drinking of others in establishments offering free refills. And if determined soda-buyers choose to buy multiple smaller containers and/or vendors raise soda prices, the plan could conceivably function as a back-door soda tax – but one that lines the pockets of soda purveyors, instead of providing revenue to the government (which may use the funds to defray obesity-related healthcare costs).

Third, such a ban is likely to disproportionately affect poorer New Yorkers. This might seem like an odd concern from someone who supported the food stamp soda ban, but I see a categorical difference between the use of government-issued supplemental food benefits for an entirely non-nutritive beverage, versus spending one's own money on it. In that regard, it's notable that a 24-ounce McDonald's Coke (with 81g of sugar) would be banned, but the much pricier 24-ounce Starbucks White Chocolate Mocha Frappucino (with 87g of sugar) would likely not, due to its milk content.

Finally, while no fault of Bloomberg's (who is necessarily limited to taking action only within his city), nothing in his proposal gets at one of the roots of Americans' over-consumption of soda – that is, the wrongheaded agricultural subsidies that have resulted in a liter bottle of Coke being cheaper than a similar-sized container of skim milk.

All of this said, though, I do admire Mayor Bloomberg for his dogged, forward-thinking approaches to improving public health in his city, where, currently, over half of adults are overweight or obese. Undeterred by the prior defeat of his proposed soda tax and food stamp/soda ban – and the $70m spent by the soda lobby around the country since 2009 to defeat such measures – Bloomberg's latest salvo does show ingenuity and real political courage.

So it may well be that, after a lot of initial grumbling, New Yorkers will eventually grow accustomed to thinking of a "large soda" as containing 16 ounces, which, it's worth noting, is still twice as large as the serving size Americans thought of as "standard" back in the 1950s. Moreover, if the measure proves at all successful in lowering the city's rates of disease and/or obesity, that data could prove to be a powerful tool in future battles against Big Soda.

If any of that comes to pass, I'll happily eat my words here. And wash them down with a very small glass of Coke.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:00 PM

cough

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:28 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Mmmmmm ... I'd probably go with a 'sin tax' myself.

But some very surprising things have not only been accepted, but welcomed by people at large. For example, the City of LA just banned plastic grocery bags to fair approval. I wouldn't think this is one of those off hand, but there's always a chance it could be.

I've come across a number of studies that implicate high-fructose corn syrup per se in obesity, diabetes, fatty liver and its often deadly complication non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, and even loss of cognitive function. It's used b/c it's far cheaper than sucrose, easy to handle, and sweeter than other types of sugars. (Oh, btw, about 40% is contaminated with dangerous levels of mercury, since the 40% of the hydroxide used to convert corn syrup into high-fructose corn syrup comes from a process that uses mercury electrodes. But HCFS's damaging effects don't come from mercury but from the HFCS itself. The risk of mercury poisoning is an added bonus.) By all the studies I've looked at, sugary things are arguably addictive to about 40% of the population.

I have to admit I haven't done a lot of thinking about this, but this seems to me this is at the point where cigarettes were decades ago. Evidence was mounting they were linked to many diseases, and while tobacco companies disputed they were addictive (b/c, they claimed, you had to get high for a substance to be addictive), there was a lot of fundamental research going on into addiction itself, which eventually did provide the answer as yes, they are addictive.

My concern overall is that government at all levels is pretty thoroughly a handmaiden to business. Aside from efforts like this, I have serious doubts that we'll see any government action against companies that knowingly sell damaging addictive substances - even to children.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:43 PM

America loves a winner!

@magonsdaughter

The title of the 1896 piece was COFFIN NAILS. How more direct does one have to be before you get the picture ? That's pretty much how they saw cigarettes, not merely as 'disgusting and immoral'. Sure, those went along with the habit as well, but putting folks in the ground was also understood.

And yes, really. You go back 50, 100 years, and read the headlines and columns of the times, and they're sounding a heck of a lot like what's going on today. In a wide range of issues.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:46 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Yep, I'm totally ignorant of what I find funny and overestimate my ability to really know what I find funny.

That's EXACTLY what the study was about!

No,it's that you're too stupid to know what the hell you're talking about, and because of your stupidity, you have a severe false sense of pride in thinking you know of what you actually don't.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 4:54 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Uhm - you're funny.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
@magonsdaughter

The title of the 1896 piece was COFFIN NAILS. How more direct does one have to be before you get the picture ? That's pretty much how they saw cigarettes, not merely as 'disgusting and immoral'. Sure, those went along with the habit as well, but putting folks in the ground was also understood.

And yes, really. You go back 50, 100 years, and read the headlines and columns of the times, and they're sounding a heck of a lot like what's going on today. In a wide range of issues.

the bit you posted only mentions moral and mental decay, but I am sure anecdotally people had seen the physical deterioration of those who smoked regularly.

So your point is what, exactly? That the tobacco companies lied and obsfucated the truth, sold an image of vitality and sexiness that was the complete opposite of what their product offered? Do you think they are the only advertisers to do so?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:24 PM

America loves a winner!

Early on, coca-cola DID help drinkers fight fatigue. It had cocaine ! I'm guess that really was a nice pick me up during the 2 pm blahs at work.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:39 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

Also Magons, when it comes to the big mean gummint depriving tobacco corporations of money, it had to jump through extraordinary hoops to have a level of proof that was legally acceptable JUST TO BE ABLE TO PRINT WARNINGS and limit the sale to children. For example, DO cigarettes causes asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, vascular disease, heart disease and cancer? Well, was there was a relationship? After all, some people who never smoked got those diseases, and some people who smoked a lot never got them. So, can you REALLY say cigarettes cause disease ...? Hmmmmmm??? And can you REALLY say they're addictive??? Sure some people seem to be stuck on them, but then other people quit quite easily. And, how can they be addictive if you don't get buzzed? After all, think of all the other substances that are addictive, like alcohol, cocaine, and heroin. They make you feel good, and that's the draw that makes people keep keep coming back until they become habituated. But cigarettes??? C'mon.

The Waxman Hearings
April 14, 1994
House of Representatives

The US government was stymied for decades by these tactics.

As for people 'knowing' that tobacco was unhealthy and addictive, for every individual or group claiming they were, there were other individuals and groups claiming they weren't. There was no common public consensus. Both my parents, born in 1920s, smoked. My mother told me that there was some belief they were protective against TB, which was a scourge in the US at the time. My father was given cigarettes in the military. They both later came to regret smoking, both eventually quit after decades of smoking, but it's not true that AT THE TIME THEY STARTED there was a taboo against them as dangerous, and a feeling people who smoked were foolish for starting.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:47 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

"Early on, coca-cola DID help drinkers fight fatigue. It had cocaine ! I'm guess that really was a nice pick me up during the 2 pm blahs at work."

It looks like the ad for Coca-Cola was from 1909. By that time pre-extracted coca leaves had already been substituted with coca leaves with the cocaine already extracted from them.

Coke was originally formulated in 1886 by one John Styth Pemberton, an Atlanta druggist and former Confederate army officer. Among other things it contained (and presumably still contains) three parts coca leaves to one part cola nut. ... How much cocaine Coke actually contained and how much kick you got from it is not known (a Coke spokesman today says the amount was "trivial").

... In the 1890s, however, public sentiment began to turn against cocaine ... In 1903 the New York Tribune published an article linking cocaine with black crime and calling for legal action against Coca-Cola. Shortly thereafter Coke quietly switched from fresh to "spent" coca leaves (i.e., what's left over after the cocaine has been removed). It also stopped advertising Coke as a cure for what ails you and instead promoted it simply as a refreshing beverage.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:52 PM

i hear you, ikiki. My mum started smoking during the war when the army gave out cigarettes as part of rations. She died prematurely from smoking related causes, and more to the point, was robbed of 10 years of decent living by the disease. She smoked for many years without realising the harm it was causing her (and us, seeing as she smoked through her pregnancies).

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 5:53 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
It looks like the ad for Coca-Cola was from 1909. By that time cocaine had already been removed as an ingredient.

Coke was originally formulated in 1886 by one John Styth Pemberton, an Atlanta druggist and former Confederate army officer. Among other things it contained (and presumably still contains) three parts coca leaves to one part cola nut. ... How much cocaine Coke actually contained and how much kick you got from it is not known (a Coke spokesman today says the amount was "trivial").

... In the 1890s, however, public sentiment began to turn against cocaine ... In 1903 the New York Tribune published an article linking cocaine with black crime and calling for legal action against Coca-Cola. Shortly thereafter Coke quietly switched from fresh to "spent" coca leaves (i.e., what's left over after the cocaine has been removed). It also stopped advertising Coke as a cure for what ails you and instead promoted it simply as a refreshing beverage.

It was probably never present in high amounts anyway...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 6:01 PM

Goodbye, kind world (George Monbiot) - In common with all those generations which have contemplated catastrophe, we appear to be incapable of understanding what confronts us.

It looks like by 1902 the amount of cocaine precursor was around .02 parts per million.

http://www.snopes.com/cokelore/cocaine.asp

What can I say - the medical tester in me had to find out.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, June 3, 2012 6:12 PM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

And clearly, you don't read MY posts either. The ill effects of cigarette smoking was known well over 100 years ago.

...and that means what? I think it just points out that the government did not move fast enough to regulate tobacco.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 1:49 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

@all: I find it very amusing that when the Gov doesn't regulate enough it is demonized, and when it tries to do something, albeit a tad clumsily, to protect the peeps, it is demonized. Makes you wonder why it even tries.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 4:30 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Quote:
Originally posted by pizmobeach:
@all: I find it very amusing that when the Gov doesn't regulate enough it is demonized, and when it tries to do something, albeit a tad clumsily, to protect the peeps, it is demonized. Makes you wonder why it even tries.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

Hello,

At the risk of seeming callous to the strivings of government, perhaps people prefer outcomes outside of the two you present.

1) Do nothing.
2) Do something badly.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Never forget what these men are.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 5:48 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

In a perfect world, sure. But I see it as people expecting their gov to:

1. Do something perfectly that satisfies everyone, or
2. Do nothing

So, much of the time nothing is done, the can gets kicked down the road as we discuss discuss perfect perfect. I see project creep a lot in my RL, people favoring the safety of inactivity over the risk of making choices and failing and possibly suffering public ridicule for not getting it perfect. Ironically, I think it is responsible for some of these ills, gov agencies/people not having the guts to make tough, less than perfect choices.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:02 AM

M52NICKERSON

DALEK!

You can please most of the people some of the time, some of the people most of the time, but you can't please all of the people all of the time.

I do not fear God, I fear the ignorance of man.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:17 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
I love it when people debate little Rappy with facts. It’s fun to watch his brain blow up.

I don't love it, because that's not what happens. If you pay attention and read his posts, what happens is Raptor makes an absurd statement(s) or puts up a post with an obviously-baited title, then sits back and chortles while others try to respond, refute, debate with reasons, facts and figures. Then he makes another over-the-top statement(s), and now has the excuse to add personal insults, usually something about "childish". He then sits back, chortles, and waits for the attempt to communicate/debate/reason with him. Every time someone does, it gives him the opportunity to do it again, and again, and again, and there goes the thread. Pick almosts any thread, and follow his interactions with almost ANYONE (especially those he knows are susceptible), and it's totally easy to see the pattern. He doesn't have to be deluded, or stupid, he's totally predictable but it works almost every time. He's got a closet full of canned responses, he uses the same ones over and over, and some fall right into the trap--or else so enjoy playing his game that's what THEY're here for, too. I don't know which, but I just cannot believe people here are that stupid, so there must be SOME reason.

Quote:
Thank for the laugh.

What you don't get is that it's HIM doing the laughing...he's even admitted his tactics, but that changed nothing.

Check it out. Pick a thread. It's there for anyone who bothers to see it. This thread isn't a good example, because he does bother to make a few valid points and mostly refrains from his usual code words and personal attacks, but it's the exception rather than the rule.

The biggest ACTUAL laugh is that he's the perfect example of Dunning-Kruger himself:

Quote:
The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias in which unskilled individuals suffer from illusory superiority, mistakenly rating their ability much higher than average. This bias is attributed to a metacognitive inability of the unskilled to recognize their mistakes.

His ability in this regard isn't higher than the average, he IS unskilled and his illusion of supriority IS an illusion. The problem is, it doesn't TAKE much skill to elicit the responses he wantws; the people he's baiting are so easily hooked, some out of Pavlovian training, some blinded by thinking it's an actual communication (I guess?), that they don't see (apparently) what's happening, so he thinks he's superior.

In cases such as this thread, people manage to communicate back and forth for a few threads when he shuts up, or they responded to some actual point he makes and move on. But for many threads, it just becomes a regular pattern of taking the bait and running with it, and allowing him to continue his idiocy post after post.

And yes, Mike, bread is my main weakness too...I all but LIVE on sourdough, for breakfast and dinner. It's a conundrum. But then I still smoke, so my lack of self-control is clear.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:24 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Quote:
I see project creep a lot in my RL, people favoring the safety of inactivity over the risk of making choices and failing and possibly suffering public ridicule for not getting it perfect. Ironically, I think it is responsible for some of these ills, gov agencies/people not having the guts to make tough, less than perfect choices.

Well said, Pizmo, and I wholeheartedly agree. It's part of human weakness, isn't it? It's the rare person who will put themselves out there, and of course government is often a perfect composite of human failings and weaknesses.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:25 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
I don't love it, because that's not what happens. If you pay attention and read his posts, what happens is Raptor makes an absurd statement(s) or puts up a post with an obviously-baited title, then sits back and chortles while others try to respond, refute, debate with reasons, facts and figures. Then he makes another over-the-top statement(s), and now has the excuse to add personal insults...

Niki , cite for me which absurd statements I've made in THIS thread, if you can.

TIA

And please, you act as if you've never started a thread w/ a baited, slanted title ?

guffaw.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:37 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by WULFENSTAR:
Why am I not surprised at the usual suspects defending this?

I'm continually disapointed by these people here who claim to have watched Firefly defending the works of the purple-bellies.

Drinking a 300 ounce Coke as I write this.

"None of you seem to understand. I'm not locked in here with you... YOU are locked in here with ME."

Gee, the villiage idiot responded without bothering to read.

Again.

Im sure we're all stunned with surprise. Of course,since he clearly doesn't read (maybe someone should correct him in a Youtube video?), he'll never know he made a mistake, and will contuinue thinking he's the one with the answers.

Kinda harkens to that other thread about people too stupid to realize how stupid they really are.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:
I don't love it, because that's not what happens. If you pay attention and read his posts, what happens is Raptor makes an absurd statement(s) or puts up a post with an obviously-baited title, then sits back and chortles while others try to respond, refute, debate with reasons, facts and figures. Then he makes another over-the-top statement(s), and now has the excuse to add personal insults...

Niki , cite for me which absurd statements I've made in THIS thread, if you can.

TIA

And please, you act as if you've never started a thread w/ a baited, slanted title ?

guffaw.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

Cute. You've managed to not go into "foam at the mouth" mode in one thread - so its the only one that counts? Your constant and repetitiouse behaviour andt tactics over the course of years here - don't count when discussing your behaviour and tactics??

Priceless.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:54 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by 1kiki:
Yep, I'm totally ignorant of what I find funny and overestimate my ability to really know what I find funny.

That's EXACTLY what the study was about!

No,it's that you're too stupid to know what the hell you're talking about, and because of your stupidity, you have a severe false sense of pride in thinking you know of what you actually don't.

Kinda like when you claim that Scotts intentionally selling bird poison as bird food had nothing to do with greed? Was that what you meant when you said you're "too stupid to know what the hell you're talking about"?

If so, I agree. You ARE too stupid to know what you're talking about.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 7:41 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:

Quote:
I don't love it, because that's not what happens. If you pay attention and read his posts, what happens is Raptor makes an absurd statement(s) or puts up a post with an obviously-baited title, then sits back and chortles while others try to respond, refute, debate with reasons, facts and figures. Then he makes another over-the-top statement(s), and now has the excuse to add personal insults...

Niki , cite for me which absurd statements I've made in THIS thread, if you can.

TIA

And please, you act as if you've never started a thread w/ a baited, slanted title ?

guffaw.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

Cute. You've managed to not go into "foam at the mouth" mode in one thread - so its the only one that counts? Your constant and repetitiouse behaviour andt tactics over the course of years here - don't count when discussing your behaviour and tactics??

Priceless.

Noting how ...

You're not Niki, and you've got nothing either.

Crassic.

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes his idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me and apologizes.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the people who don't do anything about it." - Albert Einstein

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 11:45 AM

It's always amsuing when I present your argument as completely rediculous, and you rush in to agree with it.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 1:04 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
It's always amsuing when I present your argument as completely rediculous, and you rush in to agree with it.

Me stating that you have no example of me saying something absurd is , in your mind, agreeing with you and your empty claim?

Huh.

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes that idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me, and what he claims I think about women. I'm due an apology from him.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the peop

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 1:25 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
If we're doing quotes instead of writing our own thoughts, here's a good one.

Here's a more concise version of basically the same thing:

“America...just a nation of two hundred million used car salesmen with all the money we need to buy guns and no qualms about killing anybody else in the world who tries to make us uncomfortable”
― Hunter S. Thompson

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 1:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
It's always amsuing when I present your argument as completely rediculous, and you rush in to agree with it.

Me stating that you have no example of me saying something absurd is , in your mind, agreeing with you and your empty claim?

Huh.

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the peop

Your sig line is getting shorter and shorter.

Also, weren't you the one bitching because Nickerson had put too many "qualifiers" and conditions on his challenge to you?

So now you want to load things down with qualifiers and conditions. "Show me where IN THIS THREAD..." ; "Noting how... YOU'RE NOT NIKI..."

Huh.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 1:51 PM

America loves a winner!

My sig is my sig. But thanks for noticing.

I asked NIKI, not anyone else. Plain, simple, and direct. Clear enough for anyone to understand. Even you.

And still, while others ( not Niki ) thought enough to respond anyways, they STILL omitted the singular point of the question, to cite where I'd said something 'absurd'.

Funny, that.

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes that idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me, and what he claims I think about women. I'm due an apology from him.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the peop

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 2:47 PM

Good thing Rappy never interjects into other conversations, otherwise, he might come off as a wee bit hypocrit...LOL!

Nah, can't even get through that sentence without laughing.

Its just not "qualified" enough for this thread.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 3:28 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht

I'm the type of person who draws a line in her sand and says "this is the point that shouldn't be gone past, anything up to this point is acceptable." This has gone over my line, its too bossy. The thing is that I don't have a problem with tax on cigs or alcohol the way its done in my state. Would I have a problem with a pop tax? Maybe, but maybe not. I don't drink pop so it won't effect me either way, so I'm rather neutral, maybe slightly opposed, but my mind could be changed. But what the NY mayor is preposing is over the top and I'm opposed to it.

I think a better idea would be to ban that high fructos corn syrup, then companies could find healthier ways to make their product and everyone could drink what they want and still be healthier, attack the problem instead of bossing companies on serving size and bossing people on what they should drink.

I assume you're my pal until you let me know otherwise.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 3:39 PM

America loves a winner!

If I had a business in NYC, I'd sell sodas exclusively in 32 oz cups, and up. Free refills, for everyone !

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes that idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me, and what he claims I think about women. I'm due an apology from him.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the peop

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
My sig is my sig. But thanks for noticing.

But apparently YOU haven't noticed it lately. It's getting shorter and shorter. It used to mention someone named "Albert Eins" (I kid you not, that was earlier today); now it cuts off at "peop-".

But hey, if you don't mind looking like an idiot, you should be used to it by now...

Quote:

I asked NIKI, not anyone else. Plain, simple, and direct. Clear enough for anyone to understand. Even you.

So is that a promise from you to keep your fucking cake-hole shut next time I ask someone else a direct question? You won't offer your two cents? Promise? Can I quote you on it?

And here I thought this was an open forum. Seems if you want to ask Niki a direct question that only she gets to see and answer, you'd be able to figure out some magical way to do so. You could even give it a fanciful name, like "Private Message", or some such.

Quote:

And still, while others ( not Niki ) thought enough to respond anyways, they STILL omitted the singular point of the question, to cite where I'd said something 'absurd'.

"95% of Americans pay no taxes."

The assertion that Scotts selling of bird poison as bird food had NOTHING to do with greed, and anyone who thought it did was a "dick head" for thinking that.

Funny, that.

Also, your little hidden message in your signature is quite absurd, because Anthony is completely correct about your statements and claims, which were all manner of absurd.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 6:32 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
If I had a business in NYC, I'd sell sodas exclusively in 32 oz cups, and up. Free refills, for everyone !

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes that idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me, and what he claims I think about women. I'm due an apology from him.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

"The world is a dangerous place. Not because of the people who are evil; but because of the peop

And I'd set up a stand selling insulin right next door and make a fortune.

"I supported Bush in 2000 and 2004 and intellegence [sic] had very little to do with that decision." - Hero

"I've not watched the video either, or am incapable of intellectually dealing with the substance of this thread, so I'll instead act like a juvenile and claim victory..." - Rappy

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, June 4, 2012 11:44 PM

... fully loaded, safety off...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/media/in-nutrition-initiati
ve-disney-to-restrict-advertising.html?_r=1&hp

Nah, couldn't be related, not possible, no way in hell... if I don't know how something works then it can't work that way...

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 1:17 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/media/in-nutrition-initiati
ve-disney-to-restrict-advertising.html?_r=1&hp

Nah, couldn't be related, not possible, no way in hell... if I don't know how something works then it can't work that way...

Not real sure how this is related. Disney is a private company, and can't make it illegal for anyone to buy or purchase a product. Like must venues open to the public though, I'm sure the folks @ Disney are tired of seeing obese customers waddle through their parks, stuffing themselves into those 'tiny' little seats, and scarfing down tons of over priced foods at their restaurants. Bloomberg doesn't own NYC, and shouldn't act as if he does.

Quote:
So is that a promise from you to keep your fucking cake-hole shut next time I ask someone else a direct question? You won't offer your two cents? Promise? Can I quote you on it?

And here I thought this was an open forum. Seems if you want to ask Niki a direct question that only she gets to see and answer, you'd be able to figure out some magical way to do so. You could even give it a fanciful name, like "Private Message", or some such.

I find it amusing that, after all this time of telling others to avoid me, while not doing so herself, Niki picks THIS time to side step a straight forward question, no snark, no sarcasm , what so ever. Oh well.

Anthony bears false witness about my views and YOU love to take things completely out of context. Some things never change.

Note to anyone - Anthony is a sack of go se, and will continue to be one until he removes that idiotic signature concerning his bald face lie about me, and what he claims I think about women. I'm due an apology from him.

" We're all just folk. " - Mal

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 4:09 AM

... fully loaded, safety off...

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/05/business/media/in-nutrition-initiati
ve-disney-to-restrict-advertising.html?_r=1&hp

Nah, couldn't be related, not possible, no way in hell... if I don't know how something works then it can't work that way...

Not real sure how this is related.

No problem, the viral behavior/potential of the 'Net is not understood by a lot of people. Advertisers and news sites get it, HKC gets it, "awareness" is key. So even if your solution is not perfect, if it gets attention it has the chance of sparking other people to take action. Enough Awareness you can effect Change.

Scifi movie music + Firefly dialogue clips, 24 hours a day - http://www.scifiradio.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:06 AM

One thing that bothers me: not very far behind the " American youth obesity" crisis is the American military. Whenever the subject comes up, a couple of weeks in, somebody mentions the Department of Defense: " 1/4 of American youth are too obese to pass the physical fitness requirement for basic training.", etc.

So all you kids out there gotta stay in shape for when we reinstate the draft, so you can survive Basic and become cannon fodder.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:17 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Kwicko:
Also, your little hidden message in your signature is quite absurd, because Anthony is completely correct about your statements and claims, which were all manner of absurd.

Ooh, he's back to that sad little pity ploy? Cool, I had fun with that last time he got to feelin all persecuted.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
One thing that bothers me: not very far behind the " American youth obesity" crisis is the American military. Whenever the subject comes up, a couple of weeks in, somebody mentions the Department of Defense: " 1/4 of American youth are too obese to pass the physical fitness requirement for basic training.", etc.

So all you kids out there gotta stay in shape for when we reinstate the draft, so you can survive Basic and become cannon fodder.

Well, if we actually reinstated the draft - we very likely would have ended our current wars by now - so Im okay with that, from an anti-war perspective.

But beyond the notion of a draft - it seems like a reasonable base metric. If a kid isn't even capable of starting the basic physical training - and this is at ther physical peak, more or less, they are pretty likely to grow up to be a WalMart Elephant.

Note to anyone - Please pity the poor, poor wittle Rappyboy. He's feeling put upon lately, what with all those facts disagreeing with what he believes.

"Goram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Engage!"

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 5:38 AM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important

Hello,

Sometimes I think there is a version of the draft that might eliminate all war.

Draft age begins at retirement age minus four years. (Age 61 or some such, I believe?)

Draft continues year by year and ends at age 22 (to allow all youths to get 4 year degrees if desired before being drafted.)

I very much doubt warfare would continue to exist under such a scenario.

--Anthony

Note to Self:
Raptor - women who want to control their reproductive processes are sluts.
Wulf - Niki is a stupid fucking bitch who should hurry up and die.
Never forget what these men are.
“The stupid neither forgive nor forget; the naive forgive and forget; the wise forgive but do not forget.” -Thomas Szasz

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 7:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
One thing that bothers me: not very far behind the " American youth obesity" crisis is the American military. Whenever the subject comes up, a couple of weeks in, somebody mentions the Department of Defense: " 1/4 of American youth are too obese to pass the physical fitness requirement for basic training.", etc.

So all you kids out there gotta stay in shape for when we reinstate the draft, so you can survive Basic and become cannon fodder.

Well, if we actually reinstated the draft - we very likely would have ended our current wars by now - so Im okay with that, from an anti-war perspective.

But beyond the notion of a draft - it seems like a reasonable base metric. If a kid isn't even capable of starting the basic physical training - and this is at ther physical peak, more or less, they are pretty likely to grow up to be a WalMart Elephant.

I'm actually in favor of the draft- but ONLY if it was TRULY, COMPLETELY universal. Send off Romney's kid, and Bush's, not just Pedro from East LA and Leroy from Watts. But it oughtta be for government service, not just military- Peace Corps, Conservation Corps, Forest Rangers, even Government Office workers, IRS clerks, hospital orderlies, Police and Firefighter auxiliaries, teacher's aides, Congressional interns, and some artistic and cultural functions ( e.g., draft Justin Beiber, make him do USO tours).

But to use readiness for Basic Training as a yardstick , or a goal for a fitness program is putting the goal post before the kickoff-- let the military find out what the "average" physical condition of American kids IS, and tailor their training to THAT. If the kids can't measure up to the rigors of combat when they come in, spend MORE time on physical training, work them up more slowly, farther, until they ARE fit to do what they MUST, in the job they are taken in for. Airmen, sailors, medical corpsmen, even in the military, don't have to be in the same condition as infantrymen, let alone Rangers or Green Berets. Reward enhanced physical condition with promotion, or increased opportunity, motivate the draftees to get better, if they want to. And if all they want to do is do their 2 years and go home, let 'em.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 7:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by ANTHONYT:
Hello,

Sometimes I think there is a version of the draft that might eliminate all war.

Draft age begins at retirement age minus four years. (Age 61 or some such, I believe?)

Draft continues year by year and ends at age 22 (to allow all youths to get 4 year degrees if desired before being drafted.)

I very much doubt warfare would continue to exist under such a scenario.

--Anthony

Hey, I'm 61, skilled,and unemployed- I'd volunteer tomorrow.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 5, 2012 7:47 AM