Gromnir

dunno. am most assured not a supporter o' busywork; doesn't benefit student. however, in theory, a teacher who provides meaningful homework will receive useful feedback as they review homework, yes? an educator may look at homework as a way to gauge what lessons is successful and which is failing with a class before the students is compelled to take an exam and prove what they learned. also am suspecting the value o' homework as a basic survival skill might be misunderstood. unless things has changed much in the past few years, you don't get homework in university, grad school, med school, law school, etc. however, the study load at elite universities and post grad institutions o' learning increases substantial compared to even the most arduous high school homework regimen. am suspecting there is a shock to the system awaiting a student who had little homework in high school, and then sudden realize they need put in multiple hours o' work studying for every in-class hour if they wanna succeed at a decent university. am agreeing that almost none o' the homework we had to do in high school felt useful. even so, am not confident our feels represents what were useful 'bout homework. educators should be able to glean meaningful feedback from homework and homework is no doubt a basic life skill for anybody planning to go to a demanding school o' higher learning. am also guessing that if Gromnir anticipates less salient benefits o' homework, there is likely additional positives if is used appropriate as 'posed to mere busy work. HA! Good Fun!

we first saw this bit o' alt-right pith attributed to gaetz and considering his legal issues which allege the congressman's inappropriate involvement with millennial women, we thought the supposed tweet couldn't be legit, but we went to gaetz's twitter and sure enough it is bona-fide florida man. HA! Good Fun!

maybe belongs in the funny thread? moving on, susan collins is either the worst judge o' character evar, or she is a liar. is possible both is true, but am suspecting her success in politics ain't due to her being improbable gullible. and now HA! Good Fun!

if you believe republicans want a war against bodily autonomy, you ain't been paying attention to the past few years o' antivax nonsense coming from the right, and you are ignoring the not insignificant number o' republicans and independents who naïve embrace a view similar to @Guard Dog with their belief the government's role is to protect their property and their "rights," and nothing else; all that annoying democracy baggage is selective ignored. nationally, republicans have been avoiding just such a war for decades 'cause it were perceived as a political loser from the 70s onward. sure, in deep red states where evangelicals hold considerable clout, abortion (not bodily autonomy and privacy) is gonna be a hill worth dying 'pon, but the republican party as a whole has been dreading the overturn o' roe near as much as has democrats. is why on fox news the new alito opinion is hardly being discussed and instead they focus on the leak aspect. a legit complete apolitical Court woulda' killed roe decades past. again, roe were a shaky plurality opinion which satisfied nobody. as previous noted, rbg were the last Justice to sit on the Court who previous to appointment public criticized the legal basis o' roe. you kid yourself if you think none but rbg were equal critical o' roe until they became Justices, but precise 'cause criticism o' roe were deemed to be instant disqualifying a potential appointee, anybody with SCOTUS aspirations would suggest roe were established law but otherwise refuse to discuss their opinion o' the case. roe has always been political. btw, five o' the seven justices who voted with the majority in roe were old, white and male republican appointees. the problem for 2022 republicans is they most assured don't want a war on bodily autonomy and privacy which is gonna lose 'em numerous educated women voters, alienate libertarians/independents and galvanize democrats, but they can't have a roe "victory" without such a war. edit: CNN Poll: As Supreme Court ruling on Roe looms, most Americans oppose overturning it story is from january, 2022. a majority o' those ~30% who were invested in overturning roe is driven by sincere religious fervor. when national elections turn on less than 1% in battleground states, otherwise fringe constituencies become disproportionate meaningful. neither democrats or republicans want this. HA! Good Fun! ps is worth reflecting 'pon why obama and the democrats didn't hold out for real abortion protections when they pushed through the ACA. democrats didn't want this fight even when they could win it, and for good reason... good but highly political reason.

your proposed legislation is so opposite o' clean. if you cannot enumerate all the situations to which your new legislation would apply, then is gonna be deemed overbroad and unconstitutional. this never makes it outta committee... anywhere. gd no doubt also wants us to ignore how much unethical but not strict illegal dr. and patient interaction which would sudden be beyond the reach o' any governing body. keep in mind, there has been over one THOUSAND proposed bills to address abortion since 1973, ranging from limited to expansive. pretend as if nobody has ever suggested legislation is wrong. too "scared s-----ss to oppose it"? you funny. for a legislator is typical safer to do nothing than do the wrong thing. virtual every Congressional effort to deal with abortion has been a grandstanding effort. actual do something is hard, but historical it has been far safer to do not. again, the number o' legislative corpses where there were a majority o' members o' Congress finding a reason to be opposed to a solution is over a thousand. as a solution, a Constitutional amendment makes the most sense. if the Constitution is a bar to abortion as a right, then the obvious fix is to change the Constitution. number o' proposed amendments to date regarding abortion? not sure. is over 100. if gd 3/4 numbers were anything other than fantasy, this would be ez. no dice. am thinking many do not realize just how opposed is evangelicals and many other christians is to abortion. if you genuine believe abortion is murder, then is understandable impossible to support any legislation or Constitutional amendment which would legitimize mass murder, even if it means you got more privacy rights 'tween you and your doctor. as an aside, the southern gop and no compromise libertarians better hope we are genuine outta the pandemic stage for covid, 'cause The Court just knocked the stuffing outta the medical privacy argument for forgoing vaccines and other medical care. HA! Good Fun! ps am personal opposed to changing filibuster, particular given how recent changes has led to increased polarization o' american politics. HOWEVER, am also not ignorant o' the fact the filibuster has a tainted history. one reason we no longer have a talky filibuster is 'cause southern Congressmen used the procedural gambit to delay passage o' the Civil Rights Acts. in 1964, the senate were functional paralyzed for 60 working days while a group o' southerners plotted to kill the landmark legislation. the majority final managed to gather 70ish votes to invoke cloture, but that bit o' bigots bass agery is one o' the reasons why the talky filibuster were ended. yeah, looking at how harry reid and then mitch mcconnel used changes to the filibuster rules is the window through which Gromnir views the situation, but am also aware history goes back a bit further than most o' us easily recollect.

good luck with that. roe were decided 7:2, but there were three concurrences, which meant there were effective four different justifications for roe. ... some ineffable alchemy o' the 1st, 4th, 9th and 14th amendments, in addition to griswold v. connecticut privacy notions plus a possible nod to substantive due process results in abortions being granted the status o' a fundamental right, but a fundamental right which nevertheless must be considered in light o' a state's desire to protect the lives o' unborn children. at conception, 'ccording to roe, a mother's privacy rights 'tween her and her doctor as she seeks medical treatment is paramount, but with each passing day, the state's interest in protecting unborn children grows. is why otherwise arbitrary trimesters is so important when discussing abortion law in the US. if any o' that clarified the situation, then you are likely taking high grade drugs and we applaud you and your doctor... or whomever might be the recreational chemist responsible for your altered and enlightened state. roe is a mess. the problem with the J. alito opinion overturning roe is it indulges the same kinda fuzzy reasoning as did roe while pretending to be a textualist interpretation. is a pandora's box scenario as the aforementioned griswold's right to privacy, as well as a whole bunch o' other substantive rights didn't have the weight o' tradition and history to support their recognition as fundamental when SCOTUS created. another J. alito opinion, american legion v. american humanist association (2019), held that giant cross were okie dokie on public land in part if it had managed to endure long enough. same tradition and history which supports giant crosses woulda' no doubt failed with an enormous star o' david or a colossal basalt statue o' baphomet, eh? the current abortion case might as well be a cf cite to the maryland cross case. tradition and history. history and tradition. is too many instances o' Justices getting history horrible wrong btw. the original right to abortion came about 'cause The Court saw some kinda fundamental right as having evolved from the ether. sure, the founders wouldn't have recognized a mother's right to abortion during the first trimester, but at some unspecified point, american society changed such that abortion became as fundamental and integral as any enumerated right. maybe such ill defined rights bother you. maybe they don't. however, J. alito takes a position which makes conservative approved values which is failing to be enumerated in The Constitution more likely to gain recognition as a right, 'cause by definition those conservative values is gonna have the weight o' tradition and history, yes? could be a history o' corruption, bigotry and ignominy, but most history is, right? so where does the present case leave a right to privacy or the recent created right to same-sex marriage? am not shocked this Court killed roe, 'cause roe were always suspect law. the thing is, Congress has known there were a problem for many decades and they were too cowardly to do anything 'bout the problem. republicans wanted to keep the abortion talking point w/o needing to actual fight the battle. democrats didn't wanna lose catholics, who btw in spite o' abortion issue split almost 50/50 on biden/trump. brown v. board of education also had legal shortcomings, but Congress, in their torpid way, managed to address those problems after a decade of strife. near fifty years has elapsed since roe and most washington politicians has been aware the decision were a corroded landmine which were eventual gonna need to be disposed. unfortunately, The Court has always been the least adept branch for disposing o' such dangers. is no SCOTUS authority to explore public policy issues or implement street level changes. The Court is only capable o' making extreme broad pronouncements and they all too frequent ignore practicalities. individual state and local governments is gonna need figure out how to navigate the new post roe landscape. innocents will suffer. we likely won't see apocalyptic scenarios play out, but there will be an unnecessary figurative and literal body count from this decision. HA! Good Fun! ps the ray walston (boothby) addition is 'cause we wanted to work in a star trek angle. after all, is our position every obsidian post is trek related whether you realize it or not.

am gonna suggest J. Roberts were not wrong in the way you believe him to be... maybe. he were still wrong. many people, particular the lawyers, get overinvested in the value o' laws. china and russia both have Constitutions and their Constitutions provide more enumerated protections o' speech and assembly than does the Constitution of the United States of America. is a specific provision in the russian Constitution that gathering for peaceful protests is protected. am wondering if you has checked the news regarding protests in russia, eh? what do you think o' the protections o' peaceful assembly granted by the russian constitution? J. Roberts recognized there were a flaw in the VRA 'cause it provided inequitable treatment based on the past misdeeds o' people many o' whom were long dead. at the same time, he believed discrimination in 1965 were not the same as it were in 2013 and he also understood the positive changes were less 'bout the civil rights and voting laws and more 'bout american's evolving notions o' acceptable social norms. Congress passing the Civil Rights Acts and the VRA were more important than the laws themselves 'cause pass such laws in a democratic republic represents changing attitudes regarding how human beings should be treated. ... am not gonna suggest J. Roberts were in 2013 some kinda naïve utopian, but am thinking he saw societal changes post 1965 as making the specific provisions o' the VRA unnecessary, particular given the arguable flawed implementation aspect o' the law. horrible mistake. citizens united v. fec exacerbated a problem which already existed: self interested politicians had a pecuniary motive for staying in office. gerrymandering were an effective tool for politicians to solidify power, particular with access to 21st century tools unavailable to the founders. so, even if J. Roberts were correct and the US south and voting districts across the nation were less bigoted than in 1965, the practical interest o' politicians in exploiting racial divisions had actual increased during the same period o' time. also, as Gromnir has observed more than once, evolution o' societal views regarding race is not unidirectional. regression and degeneration o' nation and community norms regarding race and gender is possible and the past decade o' polarization on issues o' race should make axiomatic that is just as possible for society to rot as to grow. laws is not near as important as most o' us believe 'em to be, a point we keep trying to make. J. Roberts understands that truth. unfortunately, in 2013, J. Roberts saw the evolution o' US society as inarguable and so he ignored the possibility self-interested politicians in the south and elsewhere would magnify old hatreds and grudges once the protections o' the VRA were eliminated. Roberts and the other Conservative Justices saw the VRA as flawed 'cause o' how the provisions o' the law were applied inequitable. as important, J. Roberts saw the VRA as no longer necessary 'cause americans were better than they were in 1965, which were just a horribly myopic pov. HA! Good Fun!

eight killings from raylen in season one, covering multiple events. eight. the hand wave approach to some kinda review o' his actions is what you find noteworthy? okie dokie. and US cops, by and large, non-heroic prevent crime all the time. is mostly gonna be extreme mundane stuff. be visible in a neighborhood is an effective crime deterrent, but is hardly episodic tv material. real cop thursdays is gonna be other than dramatic, which we suspect most folks would not need explained 'cause is reality and not a tv show. duh. again, ain't seen the show you reference, but recall you focused on the shootings in your post. am gonna guess have a cop show where few people is shot is probable one o' the few things accurate 'bout the show, 'cause is freaking tv and we expect unrealistic drama. in a tv show 'bout cops there is gonna be police doing either heroic or villain if you want drama, but absence o' wild west shootings and frequent lethal encounters is not a reason to experience dissonance. confusing tv and reality. HA! Good Fun! ps again, you focused on shootings, which is why Gromnir did so. we has mentioned many times how we see as a flaw that cop training all too often involves casual violence which translates to many cop encounters turning unnecessarily adversarial and brutal. if you fail attitude test or engage in contempt of cop, is a good chance you suffer. shouldn't be that way. however, the shootings is actually exceptions as 'posed to a norm or commonplace. people is too focused on the shootings, so they ignore the bigger problems.

am not sure what is the point from lexx regarding raylen. marshal givens represents a cartoony old western notion o' US law enforcement and is nothing 'bout his portrayal which we would use as an example to explain dissonance with a show wherein people is not being killed frequent. tim gutterson, rachel brooks (multiple killings each) and at least a couple unnamed marshals shot and killed suspects in justified, but that is kinda a distraction as they ain't protagonists. speaking o' cartoony westerns, that subject has also been addressed previous on these boards. old western towns, with a small handful o' exceptions, enforced draconian gun control regulations which kept towns relative safe even by modern standards. however, there were a couple o' examples which lived up to the lawless western town mythology, but those were notable exceptions and their existence were fleeting, their names forgotten by all but the most serious history geek. regardless, the not so free and wild west is far removed from the reality in part 'cause o' folks not being able to separate reality from fiction. HA! Good Fun!

is not what you wanted, but is relevant even so. https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/table-29/table-29.xls in excess o' 10 million reported police arrests made in the US in 2019. ~500k o' those were suspects of violent crimes. is not shown in the chart, but according to other sources such as wapo which attempts to track, the number of lethal police shootings o' unarmed suspects is a relative consistent ~300 per year over the past pre-covid decade. is not a statistic to be proud of, but considering the number o' armed cops making arrests every year, the number o' lethal shootings is in fact representing an extreme rarity. have also not watched the show in question, but whatever dissonance lexx and others suffer is in part 'cause o' largely misleading portrayals in other tv shows and 'cause o' media distortions. an inability o' many to separate fact from fiction is a problem. also, speaking more direct to your query: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/02/08/a-closer-look-at-police-officers-who-have-fired-their-weapon-on-duty/ "In fact, only about a quarter (27%) of all officers say they have ever fired their service weapon while on the job, according to a separate Pew Research Center survey conducted by the National Police Research Platform." am admitted surprised the urban v. rural aspect were less less dramatic skewed towards urban police weapon discharges. HA! Good Fun! ps please note the fbi stats need be taken with a potential heart stopping quantity of salt. state and local law enforcement report at their discretion and 'ccording to their own standards. the numbers the fbi releases regarding national crime stats and the like is valuable and is a decent starting point but it is always important to keep in mind the voluntary and inconsistent quality o' the reporting by state and local authorities. @Lexxthinking justified is more in line with his expectations is part o' the real disconnect. the entire marshal service averages 22 lethal shooting per year, which is actual quite high for law enforcement given marshal service numbers and as such has been the subject o' fed review on multiple occasions. raylen givens, in season one, killed eight people. am gonna guess givens averaged +4 lethal shootings per year, but is only a guess.

curious, mtg owes her seat in large part to eric holder and barack obama, though admitted, J. Roberts subsequent made mtgs possible everywhere in the US. shelby v. holder (2013) were a preclearance case decided by SCOTUS. the voting rights act o' 1965 (VRA) among other things observed how endemic systematic racism in the south had been responsible for overt prejudicial redistricting in multiple southern states and counties across the US, leading to minorities being deprived o' the one person, one vote principle which were fundamental to the furtherance o' an american democratic republic. as such, under the VRA, the feds (doj) were to review state redistricting efforts to ensure there were no funny business being attempted which would disenfranchise voters. the law problem with the statute were it applied selective to six states and a number o' additional counties as 'posed to the US entire. am suspecting you do not need a law degree to see why whenever a statute carves out exceptions, there is gonna be questions as to why such selective applicability would be equitable, yes? need a good reason to treat different. the fed review o' state redistricting is known as preclearance. in 2013, J. Roberts did a hand wave recognition o' the continued need for the VRA's preclearance provision: "Regardless of how to look at the record no one can fairly say that it shows anything approaching the 'pervasive,' 'flagrant,' 'widespread,' and 'rampant' discrimination that faced Congress in 1965, and that clearly distinguished the covered jurisdictions from the rest of the nation." SCOTUS scrapped preclearance and surprising to nobody save J. Roberts, southern states almost overnight redrew district voting maps to disenfranchise minority voters. ... the thing is, georgia republicans got the chance to redraw voting maps in 2010, and they submitted their plan under existing preclearance in 2011, two years previous to shelby. georgia's 14th district became noteworthy older and whiter. curious, eric holder and the obama administration approved georgia's redistricting plan w/o any request for adjustment, which were an unprecedented move at the time. 14th district o' georgia has been landslide red since the republican redistricting. is gonna be more mtgs in the coming years thanks to J. Roberts, but curious, mtg were made possible 'cause o' eric holder and obama. go figure. HA! Good Fun!

didn't use parentheticals, so am wondering if the person responsible for the fox news chyrons were aware o' repeating greene's spelling error. either way, is kinda amusing. Christians Aid Migrants Because Church Is Run By Satan, Marjorie Taylor Greene Says "In a clip from the interview released by the group Right Wing Watch, Voris asked Greene about Catholic organizations in the U.S. that use federal funding to help resettle undocumented immigrants and refugees. "“I thought we had a separation of church and state,” Greene said in response. "“What it is, is Satan’s controlling the church,” she continued. “The church is not doing its job, and it’s not adhering to the teachings of Christ, and it’s not adhering to what the word of God says we’re supposed to do and how we’re supposed to live.” "She added that Christian groups that say you should take care of migrants are “destroying our laws” and taking advantage of Americans." ... the sad part is am betting a few boardies agree with greene. so it goes. HA! Good Fun!

for national parks, we got those majestic redwood forests here in ca ... silly Gromnir, is another picture from our backyard. can see brick in bottom left corner which is our chimney. for walks we typical go to a nearby lake, but for the next month or so we gotta keep our dogs leashed at all times even if is no other people anywhere nearby. main reason for leashes is the abundance o' water fowl which is hatching and one o' our dogs will attack and swallow whole the fledglings if he gets the chance. is not a pretty sight when the dog gets ahold o' a bird. also, perhaps 'cause o' enduring drought conditions, rattlesnakes is extra prevalent this year, and our dogs is curious blind to snakes; will literal walk right over top o' 'em. doesn't make sense to us as the snakes (rattlesnakes, kingsnakes and others common in the area) is typical apparent to our non canine senses. even if the dogs can't see the snakes, you would assume they could smell 'em. have gotten lucky so far as has been a couple close calls. seeing as our dogs is preternatural snake dumb, am keeping 'em leashed. the dog who eats birds can seeming sense a silent and unmoving fledgling from fifty meters but will walk over a snake in his path seeming oblivious to the reptile. is weird. curious aside, rattlesnake hatchlings is as lethal as full grown snakes 'cause while they inject less venom than adult snakes, the dose is more concentrated. HA! Good Fun!

there is something wrong with the test syndrome? men have advantages when it comes to endurance. is exactly why lia thomas, a distance swimmer, is kicking the collective arses o' her competition in spite of taking performance inhibiting drugs. men got, on average, lower heart rate, increased heart size, more lung volume, and superior pulmonary function, not to mention advantageous body mass composition aspects. women are superior to men in numerous physical categories, but endurance ain't one o' 'em. is not a huge gap btw, but the study gd referenced by the marines revealed women's aerobic performance were 90% o' their male counterparts, which is not surprising given male physiological advantages. if the test is bad, fix it, but knee jerk to that solution might be telegraphing a bit. is numerous military roles and civilian jobs which require a degree and kind o' physical fitness which skews in favor o' male domination o' those occupations. so? doesn't make men better. makes men different, which as gd would note, should be obvious as 'posed to fodder for argument. is practical reasons to hire firepersons who is able to carry the average adult male outta a burning building. the weight o' the standard combat loadout is not subjective or gender based. if studies is showing that men in integrated units is needing to carry more 'cause women literal cannot pull their weight, change testing so that even more women get assigned to infantry roles is not the solution. hurl is correct that there is not many aspects o' modern society which demand a recognition o' gender differentiation, and am in complete agreement that pronouns is a non factor. in our experience if a colleague or student wanted to be referenced by a different pronoun than their birth and our enculturation would natural result, we made efforts to accommodate, 'cause were a non factor in our estimation. civilization were not gonna crumble 'cause a trans lawyer who were born phillip wanted to be addressed with feminine pronouns... though we did sometimes reflexive slip into reflexive "norms" w/o it being some kinda calculated insult. is tough to overcome five decades o' behaviour. regardless, if an individual put in the work and earned their seat at the firm's table or in the school's classroom, then the least we could do would be to speak to them in a way which made 'em more comfortable. but for those extreme limited set o' occupations and roles which men will dominate 'cause o' XY v. XX, fighting for equality has opposite of the desired result as such pointless battles convince many who is otherwise ambivalent that the defenders o' women equality is unreasonable. it's not always the test which is the problem. HA! Good Fun! ps btw, hurl's wife outlasting him could be less 'bout physical endurance and more 'bout mental toughness... 'cause counter-intuitive, women also do not benefit from an increased pain threshold many o' us assume exists and as already noted, men (on average) display superior aerobic qualities. "Epidemiologic and clinical findings clearly demonstrate that women are at increased risk for chronic pain and some evidence suggests that women may experience more severe clinical pain. Studies of experimentally induced pain have produced a very consistent pattern of results, with women exhibiting greater pain sensitivity, enhanced pain facilitation and reduced pain inhibition compared with men, though the magnitude of these sex differences varies across studies. In addition, some evidence suggests sex differences in responses to pharmacological and non-pharmacological pain treatments, though the findings differ depending on the specific treatment and perhaps on characteristics of the pain. Also, gender biases in pain treatment appear to exist, which are influenced by characteristics of both the patient and the provider."

fake news. until the cyber ninjas do a forensic review, am not buying the results, and even then the libs will cheat. you gotta read this zerohedge link... HA! Good Fun!

we got more than a couple annoying bugs in the base game post patch/dlc, so yeah, am gonna wait for at least the next patch. HA! Good Fun! ps there was a small update today which fixed more than is listed. example: the covenant of the inheritor was most assured not fixed in our game, but is now working as described, albeit with a null value addition to the item description.

for gd, is one novel which is kinda screaming for recognition: the time it never rained. from the goodreads blurb: To the ranchers and farmers of 1950s Texas, man's biggest enemy is one he can't control. With their entire livelihood pegged on the chance of a wet year or a dry year, drought has the ability to crush their whole enterprise, to determine who stands and who falls, and to take food out of the mouths of the workers and their families. To Charlie Flagg, an honest, decent, and cantankerous rancher, the drought of the early 1950s is a foe that he must fight on his own grounds. Refusing the questionable "help" of federal aid programs, Charlie and his family struggle to make the ranch survive until the time it rains again-if it ever rains again. the events o' the novel is based on the actual prolonged drought conditions o' the time, but am not able to say how authentic it were. is not one o' our favorites, but that ain't 'cause it is a bad novel. if you are expecting a whole lotta action, you will be disappointed, and from our pov, as a dyed-in-the-wool minimalist, the novel woulda' worked better as a short story as 'posed to a novel with a bit too much o' the typical western hard men doing hard work in a hard land schtick. nevertheless, if any western protagonist were meant to resonate with gd... HA! Good Fun!

the important question is, did you get the cat food and litter home to your feline? it's nice you weren't injured, but gotta keep focused on the important stuff. if after we received our driver's license and by law no longer needed an adult presence while piloting an automobile, we called and asked our father to go for a ride to get litter and chow for a cat, he woulda' hung up on us w/o saying a word, not that we ever woulda' asked for such. woulda been a weird ask from our pov. 'course am gonna assume driving in your part o' the world is not road warrior dangerous such that you would require a somebody to ride shotgun. steel self. shiny and chrome. ... truth is if we had requested same paternal companionship while we were still in the instruction permit age range (15-17+,) our father woulda' been just as likely to ignore our plea but as we were living with him at the time, is unlikely he woulda' received the petty and visceral pleasure o' terminating a phone call with us. HA! Good Fun!

you are preaching to the choir 'bout coddled millennials or whatever the newest generational label is. am, first and foremost an advocate o' personal responsibility, so the participation trophy mentality and those proclaiming it is more important to be morally right (subjective) than factually correct offends our sensibilities. 'course even Gromnir don't go so far as to suggest an entire generation is facing doom, though am suspecting every new generation needs face such hyperbolic prognostications. am also gonna observe how qanon and the maga movement undermines the notion that abandoning o' personal responsibility is somehow new or linked to wokeness. grievance and the need to blame libs, foreign nationals, minorities and intellectual elites for societal ills and personal misfortunes is sooooo 1920s-- hardly a new phenomenon and the yet we collective fail to recognize the groundhog day scenario for what it is. dunno, perhaps if the maga crowd had teachers who were a bit more woke, we wouldn't be facing events such as: but am similar not giving the educated libs an out neither as antifa, while hardly the threat imagined by a few boardies, is populated by young and educated liberal minded individuals who believe it is not only ok but is moral right to use violence to silence messages which they decide is wrong. regardless, while it is unlikely we accept any single source as definitive regarding what the mythic monolithic "academia" is trying to tell "us," we will make it part o' our further education... which is how is s'posed to work; more speech and not less. HA! Good Fun! ps am recommending the following: Strangers in the Land: Patterns of American Nativism, 1860-1925

doubt it. as we already noted, am in favour o' educators, by means o' pedagogy and curriculum, teaching their students 'bout the evils o' bigotry and prejudice while simultaneous modeling social behaviors related to those concepts... which as far as we can tell is wokeness from at least the 1960s through today. the fact young people take lessons learned to comical extremes is hardly an argument against educating. solution, if is needed, is more education and not censorship. am just not seeing how this is a real issue. if kids taking an otherwise good idea to comical extremes were a real problem we would need shut down all universities everywhere as there is nothing more foolish than the ordinary undergrad who after a few semesters believes they has unlocked the secrets o' the universe. regardless, insofar as to what is routinely being described as wokeness these days, am almost wholly unconvinced o' a problem. takes an extreme degree o' militant adherence and compulsion to some kinda imagined dogma for us to be moved to consider wokeness in education as an issue needing to be addressed. moreover, if the gop and others cannot define wokeness, the bad wokeness such that requires legislation or government interaction to curtail, with enough precision such that the s'posed good wokeness isn't also limited, then am most assured rejecting the current campaign to eliminate wokeness... bad wokeness. "If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence."--Justice Louis Brandeis, Concurring, Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1927) our signature is not just for show. HA! Good Fun!

is the way our grandma did it. however, am gonna note how when we were in poland, the locals used pork, and only pork, and they minced. mince pork shoulder is gonna tend to be on high fat end o' the spectrum. by comparison pork tenderloin is too lean. in our experience pork loin is a good option if you wanna try the mince route. use a food processor makes kinda ez to get mince. aside, while we suspect few is genuine curious, we noticed our orii link were useless as the jerks won't show you the shipping costs unless you have an account and are signed-in. No. of Refills Ordered S & H Fees 1 - 4 $6.25 5 - 10 $11.00 11 - 20 $18.50 21 - 30 $23.00 31 - 45 $33.00 46 - 60 $43.00 61 - 75 $53.00 final @ShadySands am gonna admit one o' our grandmothers used miracle whip frequent, and she were a far better cook than Gromnir is or is ever likely to be. she used miracle whip for those midwestern slaws and salads (e.g. cole slaw and potato salad) which tend to be a bit on the sweet side compared to variations found in other parts o' the US. ain't mere nostalgia neither nostalgia coloring our recollection as grandma were kinda a legend in our family as a peerless sorceress in the kitchen. am s'posing if the "heavy" attribute o' mayo bothers you, then miracle whip is a good substitute. ... am nevertheless more likely to thrust a fork into our eyeball than use miracle whip. HA! Good Fun!

more trump funny before disinfectant day expires am recalling our father, a couple years before he died, suffered a transient ischemic attack. while in the hospital post episode, dad were given the test trump describes as a prerequisite for being released. the fact a trump doctor had this test administered is what should raise questions, but the former guy talks 'bout it as if he received the fields medal or a nobel prize. HA! Good Fun!

is the crux o' the issue... if there is a real issue. am thinking "the point where "genuine value" gets left behind" is gonna be difficult to identify and highly subjective regardless. given the nebulous notion o' the complaint, am thinking educators should be given broad latitude and nothing save genuine egregious should be subject to correction. from a rational and reasonable pov, am not seeing as a real issue save for fact that what should be at worst eye-roll fodder has been weaponized. keep in mind, am thinking the white privilege stuff and the tendency to wanna decry every situation in which women or minorities do not achieve equal representation as deserving to be called racist is harmful. we want firefighters to be minimal capable o' certain feats o' endurance and strength regardless o' gender. reduce physical requirements just to get more women representation in a fire department with less than X% females is so not a win. regardless o' race, we want our doctor to have (better than) minimum qualifications, and if representation o' native americans is too low, we want the problem to be fixed before those native americans become doctors and not at the end o' the process. @Hurlsnot mentioned once how his students seeming saw racism in almost everything and am not sure this is a good trend, particular given how such has been used to polarize our society this last decade. like it or not, 'cause is a democratic republic, minorities need whites to bring 'bout positive changes and if a significant % o' whites increasing see any discussion o' race as adversarial, then change becomes less likely, yes? even so, the trend o' complaining o' wokeness annoys us more than a little, and perhaps more than hurlsnot students and their ubiquitous perception o' racism. we can work with students being taught to see racism in every phrase or image. however, once you censor and self censor education so that mention o' any race issue which could make students uncomfortable is exorcised (and that is the language being used by a few state laws) the opportunities for enlightenment become far more limited. HA! Good Fun!

we were physics at berkeley in late 80s, so not the same as engineering or cs. gut level demographics as am recalling: +80% male. o' the women in the program, almost 25% were foreign nationals, though am gonna note many o' those were working hard to find ways to stay in the US following graduation. in more concrete terms, our graduating class had 'bout 120 awarded a bs in physics. so if our demographic guestimates is correct, 18 woulda' been women who were not foreign nationals. sounds 'bout right. 'course keep in mind we went to a particular inclusive/hippie university... sorta. gotta be careful considering today's environment. refer to young women as "girls" may be seen reflexive as patronizing especial on a board like this where 'cause o' general anonymity most readers will not realize just how old is gorth and that your girls remark is likely a innocuous descriptor o' any woman under 30 (35?) with whom you may have crossed paths over the decades. HA! Good Fun! ps as for demographics, the real curiosity were african americans. the issue got special attention 'cause there were literal two african american students enrolled in undergrad physics during the three years we were enrolled. were a fair number o' latinos but had as many native americans as african americans. explanation were that all the african american students with grades to get into Cal were also getting scholarships for princeton and stanford, so...

y'know, the thing am kinda confused 'bout is the weird preoccupation with indoctrination/wokeness and schools. obvious people has been concerned 'bout school indoctrination since before most boardies were born, but we always just assumed such enculturation/socializing were a fundamental quality o' education. in the US, particular 'round the 1960s or so, there were a general and nationwide effort to help kids overcome the baggage o' bigotry they likely had been shouldering 'cause o' past generations o' reflexive and unconscious prejudices. schools were integrated and teachers were encouraged to create classroom environments where races and genders were treated equitable. am curious why so many sudden think educators teaching kids to avoid bigotry along with chemistry and english grammar is unnecessary or even harmful. am knowing have said this previous, but human brains don't fully develop until teens and as late as mid twenties, and one o' the last stages is the formation o' a personal sense o' moral responsibility and all the rationality and social navigation skills we assume adults should possess, but so few do. schools get as much if not more chances to help kids develop social and moral as does parents and it would be gross negligent if educators treated schools as a lord of the flies or survival game scenario where other than teaching subject mater and maintaining classroom order, teachers allowed kids to teach themselves social etiquette and differences 'tween right and wrong. humans is by nature predatory social creatures who group for protection and target the weak, 'cause doing so is a good approach to survival. 'course this means kids who is different, weak, or part o' a minority group is likely to be the target o' all those base and vulgar behaviors parents pretend only other kids engage. as far as we can tell, perceived complaints o' wokeness in schools is an overt resistance to teachers being reasonable and responsible. generations o' familial and cultural bigotry don't magic disappear if educators take a hands-off approach in schools, promoting a state of nature environment where kids, freed from the immediate supervision o' their parents, make up their own programs o' enculturation and socialization. we want teachers to not only teach subject matter but to model appropriate social behavior, yes? nevertheless, am getting how this happened. the current gop is 'bout grievance and outrage. working class whites is suffering right along with historical minority groups. those whites struggling to make ends meet are angry and rush limbaugh and steve bannon helped convince those whites that they is the real victims o' racial prejudice. the libs wanna save minorities by punishing whites, or somesuch. white privilege is a hard sell to those caucasians who can't find a decent factory job as did their father or has been in danger o' losing the family farm for decades. in 2022, every time a lib mentions race and in almost any context, the new reflexive reaction from working class whites is outrage, and professional whites is willing to be complicit. check reactions to the recent Justice Jackson confirmation hearings. lindsey graham, josh hawley and ted cruz were stoking anger and it failed with most Americans, but that don't mean they failed. those senators were only genuine speaking to those who need outrage. focusing on the Q favorite pedophile angle? point out a public defender defended terrorists? define womanhood? those avenues o' attack were not meant to resonate with white suburban woman, but the gop don't care. the gop needs the trump base to stay outraged, 'cause if they don't stay angry they is gonna realize those lib programs such as infrastructure spending and easing off the trade wars is benefiting them more than were than tax cuts for the rich. the gop is current beholden to maybe ⅓ o' their own party's voters and the recent (complete not surprise) reveals regarding mcconnell and mccarthy make it all too obvious that the gop politicians is all 'bout keeping the base happy regardless o' what they believe is right or good for the republic. inflation should be enough to sink democrats at the midterms, even if the inflation is at least as much the fault o' trump and his fed appointees as it is biden's spending spree. even so, 2022 republicans don't have a real platform other than outrage and grievance. fiscal responsibility went out the window during the trump years. resisting authoritarians abroad, a gop hallmark since nixon has been replaced by the trumpy bromance with putin, xi and their ilk. trade wars 'stead o' free trade? w/o anything real, the gop needs to keep every voter and the only reason a significant number o' working class voters have for choosing the gop instead o' the libs is anger at socialism (but not real socialism), wokeness (whatever wokeness is) and planned parenthood. regardless, am genuine not understanding why woke educators is bad. teachers modeling non bigoted behavior and informing students 'bout historical evils o' government embraced prejudice were good for better than five decades, no? to Gromnir, such educational practices and goals sound positive. so it goes. HA! Good Fun!