Certified Legendary Thread The Random Non Footy Chat Thread - General Non Footy talk

[Magpie Girl]

It's about to piss down. Just in time for school pick up

Just as I was going to go for a walk!

 

[deltablues]

We just need to follow the money trail, and all the collateral damage in oil-producing countries [History of Iran, for example] throughout the history of oil production to see the wonderful West in all its infamy.

Maybe, maybe not. Western companies (Brit and US) started the oil business (exploration, drilling, upstream and downstream infrastructure, production, transportation etc) without which the countries in the Arabian Peninsula would still be herding ruminants, diving for pearls and generally eking out a living in the sand dunes (instead of reaping the benefit of Western technology which has resulted in one of the greatest transfers of wealth - West to the Gulf - in history).

And the West entered into block [oil territory] agreements and production sharing agreements and JV's and so on which recognized the sovereign rights of the fledgling Arab states, instead of taking them over (which many other "empires" would have done). Similar with Iran pre-Revolution.

And if you have ever spoken with the local players in that region (as I have at senior level in my work in oil and gas) then you would realize that your "infamy" etc black armband view ignores that history. They fully appreciate the West's pioneering of the oil age in that area, and acknowledge that it has transformed their countries.

 

[deltablues]

Seeing as I seem to be on a roll here - a few nites ago I showed some of my buddies here a few minutes of AFL on YouTube. They listened to the commentary team and then there was pan to Barry Hall as boundary thug.

My friends were all Southerners (Texas and Louisiana) who admittedly can have difficulty with a Yankee accent, and they could not understand Barry. I tuned in and hey, I couldn't understand Barry either. He was gabbling away like a strangulated castrato at 20 to the dozen. I mean, I honestly could not follow him.

Then I tuned in to some of the Channel 7 commentators. It was like listening to a bunch of guys in a drinking school. That's OK if you are drinking buddies out in the 'burbs but surely they teach these ex-jocks, who presumably are on a decent set of numbers paid by the TV channel, some breathing exercises/articulation/voice pitch skills before they go on-camera.

By comparison, most NFL players on screen, even if they come from the projects, can articulate and speak so much more fluently than what Oz TV serves up re its ex-jock commentators.

Why is this?

 

[Magpie Girl]

Seeing as I seem to be on a roll here - a few nites ago I showed some of my buddies here a few minutes of AFL on YouTube. They listened to the commentary team and then there was pan to Barry Hall as boundary thug.

My friends were all Southerners (Texas and Louisiana) who admittedly can have difficulty with a Yankee accent, and they could not understand Barry. I tuned in and hey, I couldn't understand Barry either. He was gabbling away like a strangulated castrato at 20 to the dozen. I mean, I honestly could not follow him.

Then I tuned in to some of the Channel 7 commentators. It was like listening to a bunch of guys in a drinking school. That's OK if you are drinking buddies out in the 'burbs but surely they teach these ex-jocks, who presumably are on a decent set of numbers paid by the TV channel, some breathing exercises/articulation/voice pitch skills before they go on-camera.

By comparison, most NFL players on screen, even if they come from the projects, can articulate and speak so much more fluently than what Oz TV serves up re its ex-jock commentators.

Why is this?

No argument from me.
I think they're all terrible

 

[deltablues]

No argument from me.
I think they're all terrible

Wow. Magpie Girl and I agree on something.

I must be losing my grip

 

[Magpie Girl]

Wow. Magpie Girl and I agree on something.

I must be losing my grip

When have we ever disagreed delta?
I thought we were perfectly in sync

 

[deltablues]

When have we ever disagreed delta?
I thought we were perfectly in sync

Foreplay is so seductive...

 

[Kappa]

Seeing as I seem to be on a roll here - a few nites ago I showed some of my buddies here a few minutes of AFL on YouTube. They listened to the commentary team and then there was pan to Barry Hall as boundary thug.

My friends were all Southerners (Texas and Louisiana) who admittedly can have difficulty with a Yankee accent, and they could not understand Barry. I tuned in and hey, I couldn't understand Barry either. He was gabbling away like a strangulated castrato at 20 to the dozen. I mean, I honestly could not follow him.

Then I tuned in to some of the Channel 7 commentators. It was like listening to a bunch of guys in a drinking school. That's OK if you are drinking buddies out in the 'burbs but surely they teach these ex-jocks, who presumably are on a decent set of numbers paid by the TV channel, some breathing exercises/articulation/voice pitch skills before they go on-camera.

By comparison, most NFL players on screen, even if they come from the projects, can articulate and speak so much more fluently than what Oz TV serves up re its ex-jock commentators.

Why is this?

America has 320 million population and we have 20 million population...

 

[doodles98]

Foreplay is so seductive...

I originally thought your ID was in honor of Delta Goodrems lovely blue eyes. Now I see this is just all down to my backward "Ossie" hick ignorance.

 

[jmac70]

Foreplay is so seductive...

I preferred your old avatar.

 

[deltablues]

I preferred your old avatar.

Heading back to the South so thought I'd fly Old Dixie for a while. Looking for moving waving flag, tho.

 

[jmac70]

Heading back to the South so thought I'd fly Old Dixie for a while. Looking for moving waving flag, tho.

Fair enough. What's the beer like down South?

 

[Saintly Viewed]

Southern food in America can be tasty. Rich and fatty probably

 

[Baltimore Jack]

Well France doesn't need that. The French weren't exactly subtle when they had their colonies in the Mediterranean and they have forbidden any sign of religion. But I am not talking about a few idiots, there is a part of the population that has breeding disgust and resentment for generations, easily pre dating the Gulf wars.


*edit Don't call it dumb. It is insulting and it doesn't help a bit. I can understand where they are coming from, they can't understand where their path is leading to.

The blue print for modern terrorism tactics in Europe today, started about 60 years earlier:
"It is the only way we can operate, because we are so small. So it is more efficient and more moral to go for selected targets." - Yitzhak Shamir leader of the terrorist organisation known as 'The Stern Gang' after the bombing of the King David Hotel in 1946 which killed 91 innocents (Shamir later went on to become Prime Minister)

For me, its all slaughter of innocent people and should be condemned equally

 

[Schraderbrau]

Not missed it, just gave it an unexpected twist. Don't misunderestimate me.

School chaplains ? One religion does under age boys and the other does under age girls. No thanks.
Neither of them should be funded or have a place at a school. I like the French model that favors none.

And a Go Pies to you too or as my alter Twitter ego would say: 'Adam Akhbar'

This is also a famous Bush gaff - "they misunderestimated me". He wasn't a great president but George W is probably the funniest political figure in history imo.

 

[Maggie5]

This is also a famous Bush gaff - "they misunderestimated me". He wasn't a great president but George W is probably the funniest political figure in history imo.

I reckon, Tony would give him a run for his money.

 

[Schraderbrau]

I reckon, Tony would give him a run for his money.

Well I'd class the suppository of wisdom as elite. Still I'd have to give it to Bush just for consistency and the fact that most of his gaffes came while he was leader of the free world. Anyone who calls the internet "the internets" has my respect.

 

[Maggie5]

Well I'd class the suppository of wisdom as elite. Still I'd have to give it to Bush just for consistency and the fact that most of his gaffs came while he was leader of the free world. Anyone who calls the internet "the internets" has my respect.

No, the standouts were: 's**t happens' and the 'shirtfront'.

 

[PicaBoo]

This is also a famous Bush gaff - "they misunderestimated me". He wasn't a great president but George W is probably the funniest political figure in history imo.

English might be my 2nd language but you misunderestimate me if you think I didn’t know that
With a bit of bad luck, Bush verbal exploits will soon be Trumped ( pun intended )

 

[jmac70]

What's your take on Trump deltablues?

 

[deltablues]

What's your take on Trump deltablues?

To answer you slightly obliquely - and I have made some of these points earlier in various SRP threads - the difference between the political Left and the Right, from a philosophical viewpoint, is how one views the nature and extent of the role of government in society. Most folk are centrists (a little Left and a little Right) and that sweet spot is where elections are won, usually.

But the extremists on both sides of the aisle seek to drive the Left more left, and the Right more right. That is what extremists do. Hence we now have demonization of folk along tribal lines (e.g. in a US context Republicans are red-necks not interested in the Arts and will drive their Cadillacs over the homeless etc, and Democrats are touchy/feely emoters always in search of a battle to fight or a victim to champion).

This extremism has been aided and abetted by the internet/social media. Social media has increasingly gained traction as an alternative source of information to the MSM, which has become selective in what it reports. The MSM is so agenda-driven that parts of social media are now reminiscent of the samizdat used in the old USSR.

But cutting thru all of that static, there is clearly a backlash by the average voter/independent against the professional political nomenklatura and their donors/enablers/sponsors. This has resulted in candidates such as Trump (and the flip side Bernie Sanders). Years ago we had an equivalent in Ross Perot. Political mavericks in some ways. Hillary Clinton is by comparison your typical career politician.

There are other reasons as well, such as the current US administration not enforcing Federal law in a number of key areas, including border control; free trade agreements and outsourcing of US jobs/work visa abuses; the politicization of the IRS, DOJ and others; the high cost of health care under Obamacare.

Overall I would say that many voters feel disenfranchised with the changing of normative America.There is also an air of disillusionment about the 2 main parties, who are increasingly seen as 2 ears on the same pig, feeding at the trough. At election time distinctions are drawn along party lines, but post-election it is business as usual for the professional political class.

This vibe is particularly noticeable in the independents/swinging voters, who are dismayed at having to choose between Hillary and Trump. The choice kind of echoes the old joke - whoever wants to be a politician should automatically be disqualified from running.

 

[JB1975]

To answer you slightly obliquely - and I have made some of these points earlier in various SRP threads - the difference between the political Left and the Right, from a philosophical viewpoint, is how one views the nature and extent of the role of government in society. Most folk are centrists (a little Left and a little Right) and that sweet spot is where elections are won, usually.

But the extremists on both sides of the aisle seek to drive the Left more left, and the Right more right. That is what extremists do. Hence we now have demonization of folk along tribal lines (e.g. in a US context Republicans are red-necks not interested in the Arts and will drive their Cadillacs over the homeless etc, and Democrats are touchy/feely emoters always in search of a battle to fight or a victim to champion).

This extremism has been aided and abetted by the internet/social media. Social media has increasingly gained traction as an alternative source of information to the MSM, which has become selective in what it reports. The MSM is so agenda-driven that parts of social media are now reminiscent of the samizdat used in the old USSR.

But cutting thru all of that static, there is clearly a backlash by the average voter/independent against the professional political nomenklatura and their donors/enablers/sponsors. This has resulted in candidates such as Trump (and the flip side Bernie Sanders). Years ago we had an equivalent in Ross Perot. Political mavericks in some ways. Hillary Clinton is by comparison your typical career politician.

There are other reasons as well, such as the current US administration not enforcing Federal law in a number of key areas, including border control; free trade agreements and outsourcing of US jobs/work visa abuses; the politicization of the IRS, DOJ and others; the high cost of health care under Obamacare.

Overall I would say that many voters feel disenfranchised with the changing of normative America.There is also an air of disillusionment about the 2 main parties, who are increasingly seen as 2 ears on the same pig, feeding at the trough. At election time distinctions are drawn along party lines, but post-election it is business as usual for the professional political class.

This vibe is particularly noticeable in the independents/swinging voters, who are dismayed at having to choose between Hillary and Trump. The choice kind of echoes the old joke - whoever wants to be a politician should automatically be disqualified from running.

Similar forces at work elsewhere (e.g. the Brexit vote, last Oz election). Maybe it goes too far to say democracy is in 'crisis', but it seems a little under the weather. Others might say that democracy is alive and well, and that it is only the professional pollies on the run.

 

[jmac70]

To answer you slightly obliquely - and I have made some of these points earlier in various SRP threads - the difference between the political Left and the Right, from a philosophical viewpoint, is how one views the nature and extent of the role of government in society. Most folk are centrists (a little Left and a little Right) and that sweet spot is where elections are won, usually.

But the extremists on both sides of the aisle seek to drive the Left more left, and the Right more right. That is what extremists do. Hence we now have demonization of folk along tribal lines (e.g. in a US context Republicans are red-necks not interested in the Arts and will drive their Cadillacs over the homeless etc, and Democrats are touchy/feely emoters always in search of a battle to fight or a victim to champion).

This extremism has been aided and abetted by the internet/social media. Social media has increasingly gained traction as an alternative source of information to the MSM, which has become selective in what it reports. The MSM is so agenda-driven that parts of social media are now reminiscent of the samizdat used in the old USSR.

But cutting thru all of that static, there is clearly a backlash by the average voter/independent against the professional political nomenklatura and their donors/enablers/sponsors. This has resulted in candidates such as Trump (and the flip side Bernie Sanders). Years ago we had an equivalent in Ross Perot. Political mavericks in some ways. Hillary Clinton is by comparison your typical career politician.

There are other reasons as well, such as the current US administration not enforcing Federal law in a number of key areas, including border control; free trade agreements and outsourcing of US jobs/work visa abuses; the politicization of the IRS, DOJ and others; the high cost of health care under Obamacare.

Overall I would say that many voters feel disenfranchised with the changing of normative America.There is also an air of disillusionment about the 2 main parties, who are increasingly seen as 2 ears on the same pig, feeding at the trough. At election time distinctions are drawn along party lines, but post-election it is business as usual for the professional political class.

This vibe is particularly noticeable in the independents/swinging voters, who are dismayed at having to choose between Hillary and Trump. The choice kind of echoes the old joke - whoever wants to be a politician should automatically be disqualified from running.

Thanks for your post. Trump seems somewhat unhinged and dangerous. Funnier than Bush but not in a good way.

 

[deltablues]

Similar forces at work elsewhere (e.g. the Brexit vote, last Oz election). Maybe it goes too far to say democracy is in 'crisis', but it seems a little under the weather. Others might say that democracy is alive and well, and that it is only the professional pollies on the run.

Democracy only works if the opposing parties respect each other in power and in opposition and work with each other for the common good. And the common good assumes that there is some cultural common purpose. Not a myriad of one-issue memes. You know what I mean.

And when you have extremist positions the situation becomes a zero-sum game. A tribal game where winner takes all. A binary situation. That is the the current US position, unfortunately. Like Africa.

Why is this? Some fairly obvious reasons, which I can perhaps sum-up very generally by saying that I lived for a number of years in Japan and I very much appreciated the community homogeneous cohesion and shared values there - which took me back to the '50's where you never had to lock your doors and where you never had to tread on eggshells due to the pernicious concept of cultural relativism and where, contrary to what Janis Joplin warbled, freedom was not just another word for nothing left to lose.

 

[JB1975]

Democracy only works if the opposing parties respect each other in power and in opposition and work with each other for the common good. And the common good assumes that there is some cultural common purpose. Not a myriad of one-issue memes. You know what I mean.

And when you have extremist positions the situation becomes a zero-sum game. A tribal game where winner takes all. A binary situation. That is the the current US position, unfortunately. Like Africa.

Why is this? Some fairly obvious reasons, which I can perhaps sum-up very generally by saying that I lived for a number of years in Japan and I very much appreciated the community homogeneous cohesion and shared values there - which took me back to the '50's where you never had to lock your doors and where you never had to tread on eggshells due to the pernicious concept of cultural relativism and where, contrary to what Janis Joplin warbled, freedom was not just another word for nothing left to lose.

I find it hard to recall a Golden Age where two opposing major parties (Labor or Liberal, Democrat or Republican) all sat around agreed upon some single notion of 'the common good', an Age where petty politics was put aside for a higher purpose. Major wars have often prompted a temporary respite (although WWI in Australia was probably the most divisive period of Australian political history), but politicians always resumed politicking soon enough, before as well as after the 1950s.