http://gamingtrend.com
December 18, 2014, 11:28:54 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Calendar Login Register  
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
1  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: [TV] The Flash on: December 13, 2014, 09:50:04 PM
I figured out who the "other" red flash is.


Spoiler for Hiden:
Santa Claus
2  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama on the Colbert Report on: December 13, 2014, 09:45:50 PM

Quote from: hepcat on December 11, 2014, 09:42:53 PM

Quote from: Lee on December 11, 2014, 08:56:10 PM

Quote from: hepcat on December 11, 2014, 07:56:59 PM

But certainly not "horribly biased" as you earlier asserted.  

Yeah, I think they are, they don't do a great job of providing the other side of any argument. They just point out stupidity in the government, press, etc.


I guess I misunderstood you then as I thought you were saying they were horribly biased against the right (you compared them to Fox in that regard...and Fox is unquestionably and proudly rightist).  

They ridicule both the left AND the right.  That's my point.  



They are horribly biased to what they think is correct. As am I. Nether one being totally left or right. You would be surprised how many places I come down in opposition to the Republican Party/political right.
3  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama on the Colbert Report on: December 09, 2014, 11:44:01 PM
Sadly, RCAP finds this rickety ol place lacking.


I have already prepared numerous responses to the inevitable attacks on enhanced interrogation, but it appears that I will have to wait until Comedy Central writes some new jokes about it before anyone here will become aware of the Senate report.

 ninja2
4  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama on the Colbert Report on: December 09, 2014, 03:34:45 PM
Cute, but it wasn't that funny. Certainly some truth in it. I am pretty sure Comedy Central is about as close as many liberals get to news.
5  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: OO off line for a short time on: November 27, 2014, 09:41:30 PM
I guess I should dig in my notes and find the server info. I have been spoiled by FP dealing with all the hosting headaches.

 crybaby
6  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: GOP Storms Congress: FulL Control of Senate and House on: November 06, 2014, 11:06:08 PM

Quote from: hepcat on November 06, 2014, 10:56:16 PM

Anyone who believes Obama initiated any of the things ATB mentions is showing a level of naiveté I consider very depressing.  I'm fine with saying they continued it when they shouldn't have, but the insinuation that this hasn't been going on across multiple presidents and without the tacit approval of both parties at various times is shockingly ignorant.

So it is finally time to admit that "hope and change" was really nothing more than a catchy slogan?
7  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: [NFL 2014] Week 10 on: November 06, 2014, 01:18:29 AM

Quote from: Teggy on November 06, 2014, 01:15:28 AM

Hey, who came up with that hashtag exactly?  disgust

Daniel Snyder.

Why?


 icon_lol
8  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: [TV]Gotham - Batman Prequel on: November 06, 2014, 12:45:12 AM

Quote from: hepcat on November 06, 2014, 12:42:00 AM

I just started catching up on this one.  I'm surprised to find that I'm enjoying the political/criminal machinations far more than I thought I would.  Especially Penguin's excruciatingly slow rise to power.  But the real standout for me is the kid they got to play young Bruce Wayne.  That kid is just nailing it every week.  He really makes me believe he's going to someday be one of the most dangerous men on the planet.

Yea, not only that but you really she closeness of the relationship we all know will happen as not just believable but likely. Gordon has become pretty much a surrogate father role model.

That hug moment was perfect and he really sold it. You could tell the two detectives were flabergasted to be witnessing that moment.
9  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: [TV]Gotham - Batman Prequel on: November 06, 2014, 12:40:52 AM

Quote from: rittchard on November 05, 2014, 09:27:57 PM

Quote from: MonkeyFinger on November 05, 2014, 02:04:08 AM

Morena Baccarin to join the cast of Gotham as Dr. Leslie Thompkins.

Awesome!  I love her.  But... who the heck is Leslie Thompkins?

A Doctor obviously.



Although the article I read said she was played by Mekia Cox. Maybe Morena has a different role and someone screwed up the name.

She could be my doctor any day.
10  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: [TV]Gotham - Batman Prequel on: November 06, 2014, 12:32:37 AM

Quote from: rittchard on November 04, 2014, 06:01:08 PM

I'd say last night's episode was the best of the season, I enjoyed it from beginning to end.  For better or worse, the series seems to be playing out like the Penguin origin show, as he is the real standout character thus far.  His entire story arc has really been fantastic, and even though I'm not a big fan of the actor, I really like what he's done with the role.

I still have problems with the show as a whole.  I mean, the entire freaking police force and government is corrupt or under mob control, really?  I guess that gives Gordon a goal to work toward but it just seems a bit too much.  It's frustrating to have such a no-win setup where ideally you'd want a superhero to come in and work on it, but you know inherently is just isn't going to happen due to the show's premise/gimmick.  At this point I wouldn't even mind if they just said screw the comic storyline and just jumped that adorable little David Mazouz into a Batkid outfit.  Then have Batkid and Catgirl roam the city and kick mobster ass.   nod



Agree about Penguin, I'm actually looking forward to him gaining more power.

Also Victor Zsasz's ringtone. That is some bang on funny shit.

As far as the police force goes I think it fits. Gordon needs to be out on a limb for what is right to inspire young Bruce Wayne to become involved and be the driving force behind whatever drives Gordon up to one day being commissioner while cleaning up the GTCPD to some degree. But not so much as to not still depend on a helping hand when needed from his old friend. I like this show so much it risks overtaking Blacklist as my fav.
11  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: GOP Storms Congress: FulL Control of Senate and House on: November 05, 2014, 08:29:06 PM

Quote from: ATB on November 05, 2014, 07:33:33 PM

Quote from: hepcat on November 05, 2014, 07:05:59 PM

Nothing to worry about.  If there's even a slight chance of you being able to troll people, you'll create your own thread.

I can't help it. This made me laugh.

The dusty unloved corners of R&P will be reborn with teh fury if the GOP takes the white house in 2 years.

True dat. Once POTUS Rand Paul and his best buddy Mitch McConnell start running things it will all be rosy and there will be lots of bridges...err I mean threads for me to indulge in.
12  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: GOP Storms Congress: FulL Control of Senate and House on: November 05, 2014, 07:01:26 PM

Quote from: Isgrimnur on November 05, 2014, 04:07:10 PM

Since 1900, the president's party has only gained seats in Congress three times:

FDR 1934 - Great Depression
Clinton 1998 - misplayed impeachment attempt
Bush 2002 - 9/11



Deeper than that.

Quote
The Republican wave that swept over the states left Democrats at their weakest point in state legislatures since the 1920s.

Everything went in the direction of the GOP as Republicans seized new majorities in the West Virginia House, Nevada Assembly and Senate, New Hampshire House, Minnesota House and New York Senate, The West Virginia Senate is now tied.

Control of several legislative chambers was still up in the air early Wednesday as counting continued in several tight races that will determine control of the Colorado Senate, New Mexico House and Maine Senate.

The lone bright spot for Democrats was holding majorities in the Iowa Senate and Kentucky House.

The overall number of divided state governments will increase with changes in governor in places such as Massachussets, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Maryland along with the legislatures in West Virginia, Minnesota and New York.

Quote
UPDATE: Republicans have taken control of the Colorado senate and the New Mexico house. They also have a chance to win the Colorado house and the Washington house, after mail-in ballots are finally counted. The state legislative chambers now stand at 65 Republican, 23 Democrat, 1 tie, and 4 undecided.

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/392074/democrats-sink-pre-great-depression-levels-state-legislatures-john-fund


I was starting to wonder if you guys would even have an election thread or whether the denial would be manifested by not referring to it at all.
13  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Liberal Fascism in Houston on: October 19, 2014, 04:59:08 PM

Quote from: hepcat on October 19, 2014, 12:54:04 PM

Of course, when the IRS DOES look into it, you cry foul and scream that they're being unfairly targeted.  No one wins unless they believe the same thing as you.  Of course, to be fair, that can be applied to almost everyone.

I would have no major issue with it, although if they do they should also look at all 501c3s that that were involved for the opposite political position. I would be willing to bet there were a number of c3s with some level of involvement on both sides. It really comes down to were they involved support or combat an issue or a specific candidate. I feel pretty confident the churches were far more interested in the issue being fought over by the candidates and had little interest in who the specific candidates were. Churches typicall don't care so much about people, they are an issue focused industry.
14  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Liberal Fascism in Houston on: October 19, 2014, 05:38:13 AM

Quote from: Gratch on October 18, 2014, 06:46:25 PM

Quote from: Rip on October 18, 2014, 05:19:25 PM

Quote from: Isgrimnur on October 17, 2014, 02:44:57 PM

Quote
The people of Houston and their religious leaders must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious affairs are beyond the reach of the government.”

If there was ever a chance that I would hate voted for Abbott, this statement would put the nail in that coffin.  So if they want to engage in blatant political maneuvering, snake handling, polygamy, or child marriage, their religious freedom should keep them sacrosanct from government oversight?  Bullshit.

What one engages in and what one says are two different things. One of them is protected by this thing called the 1st amendment.

You're correct, the church has every right to say whatever they please from the pulpit.  The government also has every right to ensure that what they say is in compliance with the guidelines of non-political speech that provides them the significant tax-exempt advantages they enjoy.  If those regulations are violated, then the church should have no problem paying their taxes.

I am sure there is no problem with that and if the IRS feels they have violated it I am sure they will investigate. The city of Houston however has no business in it.

In essence unless they were campaigning for a specific candidate they have a great deal of leeway.

Quote
Currently, the law prohibits political campaign activity by charities and churches by defining a 501(c)(3) organization as one "which does not participate in, or intervene in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office."

The IRS has published Revenue Ruling 2007-41, which outlines how churches, and all 501(c)(3) organizations, can stay within the law regarding the ban on political activity. Also, the ban by Congress is on political campaign activity regarding a candidate; churches and other 501(c)(3) organizations can engage in a limited amount of lobbying (including ballot measures) and advocate for or against issues that are in the political arena. The IRS also has provided guidance regarding the difference between advocating for a candidate and advocating for legislation. See political and lobbying activities.

http://www.irs.gov/uac/Charities,-Churches-and-Politics

They are allowed to advocate for or against issues. Just not for or against specific people. In any event if they have violated the federal tax law that is for the IRS to look into not some politician with an agenda.
15  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Liberal Fascism in Houston on: October 18, 2014, 05:19:25 PM

Quote from: Isgrimnur on October 17, 2014, 02:44:57 PM

Quote
The people of Houston and their religious leaders must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious affairs are beyond the reach of the government.”

If there was ever a chance that I would hate voted for Abbott, this statement would put the nail in that coffin.  So if they want to engage in blatant political maneuvering, snake handling, polygamy, or child marriage, their religious freedom should keep them sacrosanct from government oversight?  Bullshit.

What one engages in and what one says are two different things. One of them is protected by this thing called the 1st amendment.
16  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Liberal Fascism in Houston on: October 16, 2014, 09:42:26 PM
Quote
In his letter to the city attorney, Abbott said, “Whether you intend it to be so or not, your action is a direct assault on the religious liberty guaranteed by the First Amendment. The people of Houston and their religious leaders must be absolutely secure in the knowledge that their religious affairs are beyond the reach of the government.”

Quote
I recognize that the subpoenas arise from litigation related to a petition to repeal an ordinance adopted by the city council. But the litigation discovery process is not a license for government officials to inquire into religious affairs. Nor is your office’s desire to vigorously support the ordinance any excuse for these subpoenas. No matter what public policy is at stake, government officials must exercise the utmost care when our work touches on religious matters. If we err, it must be on the side of preserving the autonomy of religious institutions and the liberty of religious believers. Your aggressive and invasive subpoenas show no regard for the very serious First Amendment considerations at stake.

Quote
I urge you to demonstrate the City’s commitment to religious liberty and to true diversity of belief by unilaterally withdrawing these subpoenas immediately. Your stated intention to wait for further court proceedings falls woefully short of the urgent action needed to reassure the people of Houston that their government respects their freedom of religion and does not punish those who oppose city policies on religious grounds.

http://www.wilsoncountynews.com/article.php?id=61828&n=national-news-ag-asks-houston-city-attorney-withdraw-subpoenas-seeking-sermons-pastors
17  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Liberal Fascism in Houston on: October 16, 2014, 07:31:32 PM

Quote from: Turtle on October 16, 2014, 01:33:38 AM

Yeah, I saw this same group of articles pop in my feeds, and Fireball's statements echo my first thoughts.

It's okay to be a bit shocked at first at the idea. However, you should be more concerned that your religion, church, and your beliefs are being used as a political platform.

These rules were put in place to help keep the distance between church and state.

What rules. There is no rule justifying this and that is why it was withdrawn. It would have never survived scrutiny.

If this were legal don't you think they would be cracking down on all the inflammatory political speech that takes place in your average mosque? Investigators and prosecutors have been beaten down numerous times when they have tried to take action against hateful political speech in mosques and have lost in every case they couldn't connect it to an actual specific crime. While keeping the church out of running the state is a noble cause trying to remove politics from religious organizations is a futile endeavor.
18  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Crisis of faith or is it over? on: October 14, 2014, 08:50:35 PM

Quote from: Fireball on October 14, 2014, 08:20:22 PM

Narrowing the focus on America, because I don't know much about Christianity in many other parts of the world outside of Catholicism, Anglicanism and Orthodoxy, there has definitely been what you could call a takeover of many branches of Christianity by movement conservatives. Forty-five years ago the Southern Baptist Convention, to name a prominent example, was a middle of the road denomination that was not expressly opposed to abortion. In the 1970s a concerted effort by conservative political activists fundamentally changed the SBC and other congregational churches into a toxic breeding ground of right-wing political ideology. The notion that churches would be leading the charge against social services to poor people and championing the most cut throat notions of American capitalism would shock Christians from 50 years ago.

I bet it wouldn't shock them half as much as realizing that their organization that once was a cornerstone of race discrimination now had a black president.

I am sure they would be aghast at the conservatives allowing such a tragedy to occur.   slywink

Quote
In 1995, the Convention voted to adopt a resolution renouncing its racist roots and apologizing for its past defense of slavery, segregation, and white supremacy. This marked the denomination's first formal acknowledgment that racism had a profound role in its early and modern history. The convention recognized that the demographics of the United States were changing and has subsequently made an effort to recruit new members among minority populations.

Quote
Into the 1960s and the Civil Rights era, most Southern Baptist pastors and most members of their congregations rejected Racial integration and accepted white supremacy, further alienating African Americans.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Baptist_Convention#cite_ref-The_Southern_Baptists_2012_34-3
19  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Crisis of faith or is it over? on: October 14, 2014, 02:13:59 PM

Quote from: Fireball on October 13, 2014, 05:39:34 PM

Conservative Christians are destroying Christianity. A religion that hates gay people, denigrates women, denies science, etc, has no future because it has no truth or grace in it. Liberal Christians aren't doing enough to stop the right-wing hijacking of our religion, though it does seem some of us are finally waking up to this.

I'm a Sunday school teacher, active in my local parish, and obviously I'm not going anywhere. But I see my friends, particularly my gay friends, being driven further and further away from religion because they increasingly associate with nasty, bigoted people like Mike Huckabee and Rick Santorum, or charlatans like Joel Olsteen. What's bad about American Christianity is so toxic, it makes the far greater part of it that is good harder to acknowledge.

Ummm, I pretty sure the things you have issues with were that way long before there was even an "America" or American Christianity whatever that is.

Must be all those American Popes..............

If anything Christianity has been hijacked by liberals not the other way around. Not that such is a bad thing, just noting that Christianity is far less "right wing" today than it ever has been which makes accusations that it has been hijacked by conservatives almost laughable. The views of today's "conservative Christians" would be the views of the bleeding heart leftist Christians just a few decades ago.

 If you want to discuss a religion that has been hijacked by conservatives let's talk about Islam.
20  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Sarah Palin demands...DEMANDS...impeachment. Can still see Russia from porch. on: August 21, 2014, 08:04:30 PM
Actually nothing to do with Palin. I said that because when I check here I seldom post because the only R&P posts I see are someone mocking a conservative followed by a handful of other patting him on the back or trying to outdo whatever conservative attack was launched. Can't recall when the last time I saw an intelligent discussion here with people differing on the position in a civil manner and discussing nuances.

Just means I check a lot but post little. Just decrying that GT is becoming a place I don't get much out of unless the is some console game I want to discuss. Which is to say not very often.

For example we have a very good back and forth discussion about Ferguson going on at OO, while here there has been an anti-religion thread and an anti-Palin one. Not much to discuss there.
21  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Sarah Palin demands...DEMANDS...impeachment. Can still see Russia from porch. on: August 21, 2014, 05:38:00 PM
This forum should be renamed to "Echo Chamber"
22  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Where do you stand on the crucial topic of hotdogs? on: August 18, 2014, 02:00:32 PM
I've never found them all that hot, and I think they may not even really be made from dogs.

 ninja2
23  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Anyone been to the National WWII Museum in New Orleans? Other cool stuff there? on: August 12, 2014, 06:28:50 AM
Went last year. As noted more details in the OO thread. The 4D movie is a must. The submarine experience not so much, and that coming from a submariner. It was pretty cheesy. One day should be plenty.

My 11 year old son loved it, even my 18 year old daughter liked it and she usually hates all the historic stuff I want to visit.
24  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama seeking 1/2 Billion for Syrian Opposition on: August 11, 2014, 06:14:00 PM

Quote from: Isgrimnur on August 11, 2014, 06:00:00 PM

What does it say when Laura Ingraham blames our initial intervention for their current sorry state of affairs?

Quote
Ingraham added that she was “not saying” she wanted to see U.S. forces return to Iraq: “I don’t know if there’s a good solution right now, which is a horrible thing to say for the United States of America.”

Later in the segment, Ingraham pointed out that al Qaeda — through its ISIS offshoot group — was “becoming the Islamic state.”

“We tried to do all these things in Iraq, now Iraq is worse off!” she exclaimed. “I mean, I hate to say that, but Iraq is worse than before we went in to Iraq. Christians are gone, there’s no sense of order at all.”

“Saddam Hussein is gone. That’s a good thing, but what’s left? A more embolden Islamic state.”

Probably not much different than when Hillary blames it on Uncle Barry.

http://news.yahoo.com/clinton-blames-islamic-militants-rise-obama-policies-195239199.html;_ylt=AwrSyCNN8edTnRMAGVDQtDMD
25  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama seeking 1/2 Billion for Syrian Opposition on: August 11, 2014, 04:37:38 PM

Quote from: hepcat on August 11, 2014, 04:23:45 PM

Don't you mean "THANKS OBAMA!".

p.s. It helps when you provide evidence to support your denial of that claim.   slywink

and here I was thinking the burden of proof should be on the person making a claim.
26  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: How not to defend the second amendment on: July 26, 2014, 06:39:06 PM
Open carry, as long as it isn't alcohol.
27  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Chic fil a and their overly religious behavior. on: July 26, 2014, 06:37:28 PM

Quote from: Moliere on July 25, 2014, 03:29:24 PM

I have this aggressive customer service problem with my bank. Every time I walk in there are 3 tellers and a greeter trying to talk to me. Then they start asking me about my day, am I working today or have the day off, what's for lunch, and what are my plans for the weekend.

Your soul, we claim it.
28  Non-Gaming / Off-Topic / Re: Jack is back - 24 returning on: July 15, 2014, 11:28:24 PM
I thought it was great.

Would certainly watch another season.
29  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Net Neutrality on: July 15, 2014, 11:24:51 PM
Nice video that makes it clear the direction we are going is not neutral at all.
30  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Net Neutrality on: July 15, 2014, 09:48:47 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/video/technology/100000002881329/how-net-neutrality-works.html
31  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Sarah Palin demands...DEMANDS...impeachment. Can still see Russia from porch. on: July 13, 2014, 07:43:31 AM
Very crafty manipulation of the numbers.



http://www.zebrafactcheck.com/politifact-deportation-deception/

Doesn't take a lot of digging to see that the answer isn't so simple and that the double talk is strong.
32  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Sarah Palin demands...DEMANDS...impeachment. Can still see Russia from porch. on: July 10, 2014, 08:06:23 PM

Quote from: Fireball on July 10, 2014, 01:51:49 PM

Quote from: Ironrod on July 10, 2014, 02:42:33 AM

The President takes an oath to "faithfully execute" the laws that Congress passes, but Obama has taken it upon himself to fudge certain deadlines and other details without the consent of Congress. I don't know enough about constitutional law to judge just how flexible faithfully executing should be, but the objections have some merit. Calling a law "Obamacare" doesn't mean that Obama gets to define it as he goes along.

Impeachable? I doubt it, but impeachment is at least as much about political power as it is about legal merits.

The thing is that the laws Congress writes have all sorts of wiggle room in them. Congress writes laws that lack specificity, and then delegates to the Executive Branch the power to issue rules to fill in the gaps and adjust things to accommodate reality. This is a necessity -- otherwise it would take Congressional action to alter any program that needs small tweaks.

The President has pushed this to the edge a few times regarding the ACA, but ultimately it's all built on a foundation of precedent from previous presidents. He hasn't changed the law, he's adjusted deadlines, which has happened numerous times with previous laws. He hasn't single-handedly eliminated any provision of the law, or created entire new parts by executive order, both of which would be way out of bounds.

Ironically, on immigration he often gets accused of lawlessness when in fact he has enforced immigration law more vigorously than any previous president.

Can't imagine how you can say he vigorously enforces immigration law with a straight face.
33  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Sarah Palin demands...DEMANDS...impeachment. Can still see Russia from porch. on: July 10, 2014, 08:04:12 PM

Quote from: ATB on July 10, 2014, 11:52:01 AM

I think the problem is that he's stuck with a do nothing congress and he's forced to do whatever he can through executive orders.  I believe his use of the latter is what's testing the bounds, but WTF else is he supposed to do?  I mean I don't agree with many of his policies but if we had a congress that actually did it's job...

Heard an interesting report on NPR about Obama's approval rating is in the toilet and one of the commentators said 'We are only 18 months into his second term, and he's already a lame duck and no one is expecting him to be able to do anything.'

Fab.

A lot of good it would do them to do their job, he will just ignore any of that work he doesn't like. Seems pointless to enact laws that will only be enforced as much as the POTUS desires. Easier to let him do what he will and have no doubt the result is on him rather than to rubber stamp what he wants and potentially share in the blame for the results. Anything that works out well he will take all the credit for anyway so no upside.
34  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: Obama seeking 1/2 Billion for Syrian Opposition on: July 10, 2014, 07:55:48 PM
Hopefully you guys have tested your Iron Shield defense?

I don't want to become an innocent victim of your unholy war.

 ninja2
35  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 09:47:52 PM
Quote
About 60 percent to 75 percent of the vegetables and about 40 percent of the fruits ended up in lunchroom trash bins in 2012 — roughly the same amount as in 2011.

Ahh, but that ignores that the percentage of the lunch that was fruit and veggies went from a third to two thirds. So yeah there was more thrown away. Unless like a fool you look at the percentages of one category that gets thrown away while ignoring what percentage of the meal is comprised of that category.

BTW, I do pay taxes. I just failed to file a few years and filed late. I am filed up to date now, although I still owe money. I am pretty sure they will get their money out of me sooner or later.

36  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 07:23:22 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 07:07:41 PM

Sooooo, in your world, punishing your kid by sending them to bed without supper if they don't eat their vegetables automatically equates to "we should totally abolish lunch and save money!"  

Come on, you can do better than that.   icon_lol

Rip logic:

Rip:  Kids will die if they miss a meal!
Hepcat:  Missing one meal won't kill a kid.
Rip:  Then why feed them lunch to begin with!

Anyway...

I found this slideshow of school lunches from around the world kind of neat (scroll down the page to see the presentation).


No, what I say is why make the rest of us pay for lunches for them to just get thrown away.

Quote
SNA officials rightly point out that many students are throwing away the additional fruits and vegetables included in their lunches, amounting to $684 million in food waste every year – or roughly “enough to serve complete reimbursable school lunches to more than 228 million students,” according to the Times.

Quote
SNA critics contend the group sold out to big food companies that don’t like the “healthy” lunch overhaul, but what they don’t discuss is the overwhelming evidence that many parents and school nutrition experts also dislike the new rules.

Aside from the significant school lunch revenue declines and massive food waste tied to the changes, hungry students across the country have protested against the strict nutrition guidelines.

Many student athletes, for example, have argued their limited-calorie lunches leave them famished. Parents have reported their children are now going without school lunch, then binge eating when they get home. Parents have also complained about ridiculously strict interpretations of the federal lunch rules, which have resulted in a ban on birthday cupcakes in classrooms, among other things.

http://eagnews.org/school-nutrition-group-turns-on-michelle-o-now-fighting-federal-lunch-regulations/
37  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 07:04:07 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 06:59:09 PM

Quote from: Rip on July 07, 2014, 06:57:00 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 05:21:31 PM

Stuff totally unrelated to Rip's reply, but let's see where he tries to go!

So you are all for ending free lunch?

No, why?

Because,

Quote
Parents have been sending their kids to bed without supper for friggin' ever.  I don't see them dropping like flies over missing one meal, for christ's sake.

Sounds to me like there is no need for the rest of us to buy someone a meal. Not like they would be "dropping like flies".
38  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 06:57:00 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 05:21:31 PM

So you'd rather have them get early onset diabetes than go hungry for one meal?  It's more harmful for them to eat that shit than it is to miss one damn meal.

Parents have been sending their kids to bed without supper for friggin' ever.  I don't see them dropping like flies over missing one meal, for christ's sake.

This wussy attitude of "waaahhh....my kid can't eat twizzlers for lunch instead of a healthy meal so we shouldn't rock the boat" is such a nanny state example of lax parenting that I'm surprised you endorse it.  Kids often need to be told what's good for them.  Period.



So you are all for ending free lunch?

I don't think anyone has been serving candy for lunch. The school lunches they have had are much more healthy than what most of them eat for the other meals.

I am all for making school lunches more healthy but you have to do it with a focus on meals that taste good so they will embrace it. When a vast majority say they are horrible to the point they would embrace what they used to get it isn't going to work. Especially when you consider most of them weren't fond of the old food. Quite an accomplishment to take something that was bad and make it horrible.
39  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 05:13:34 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 04:41:42 PM

You gotta be kidding me.  I thought you were a parent?  Do you routinely tell your children to eat their veggies...but only if they want to!

Of course kids don't want to eat healthy.  That's been true for...well...ever.   Name me one kid that doesn't want to go straight to desert at dinner and skip the broccoli? 

The answer isn't to say "Oh well, better you eat huge chunks of lard than nothing at all!".  It's to say "This is what you're getting.  Eat it or go hungry until you get home." 





Then you solve nothing. Not eating isn't any healthier.

Kids that don't eat also don't learn very well. I am far more concerned with the education my kids get in school than what they eat while they are there.
40  Non-Gaming / Political / Religious Nonsense / Re: WAZ 7/3/14 on: July 07, 2014, 04:33:48 PM

Quote from: hepcat on July 07, 2014, 01:02:31 AM

Even during a time of such divisive politics, getting upset with the First Lady for trying to introduce healthier meals into our school system just baffles me with its idiocy.  People are really angry that she wants kids to eat better when child obesity has become an epidemic in this country?  Amazing.  You have to be a special kind of nut job to find that upsetting.

I would agree were it not for that it seems many of the kids would rather not eat than to eat the crap they are trying to feed them. Better they eat less healthy food than to elect to not eat at all.

Quote
Even groups originally in favor of these standards have now turned against them. One of these groups is the School Nutrition Association, which represents school cafeteria workers. Of course, they are in favor of getting kids to eat healthier, but the real problem here is that they have seen many districts losing money as a direct result of these new Michelle Obama initiated standards. The basic fact is that students simply aren’t buying these lunches. I suppose that is a side effect when you make their lunches, “taste like vomit,” according to some actual students.

Since the first round of these new standards first went into effect in 2012, more than 1 million fewer students are eating lunch at school each day. This is stark contrast to decades of steadily increasing participation among students, according to an association spokeswoman. A second round of new rules has just taken effect as of July 1, which even includes new standards for breakfast in schools.

http://downtrend.com/jrc410/michelle-obamas-school-lunches-lead-to-1-million-fewer-kids-eating/
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 11
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.33 seconds with 20 queries. (Pretty URLs adds 0.235s, 1q)