Recent Comments

1. about 6 hours ago on F Minus

   I don’t know where you have ever taken any social science course, but I’m absolutely certain you’d have a hard time finding people who have real world educational experience in social science education who would agree with your opinion.

2. about 6 hours ago on La Cucaracha

   Many if not all of them have had their minds conditioned since infancy:

   Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

3. about 7 hours ago on Prickly City

   Red MAGA nation has gone almost absolutely quiet about Biden family crime, THE LAPTOP!, LOCK HER UP!, pizzagate, many more I am forgetting at the moment … oh, yeah, and let’s not forget Benghazi!

   I expect all of these (and possibly many more!) to be trotted out ASAP when Drump and his administration begin circling the drain in coming years — just prior to a (only brief, likely) period of total silence resulting from buyers remorse. Not much more than a mere century ago MAGA dupes would have had a chance to catch up to the traveling hustler, in that copse of trees out just beyond the edge of town, before he could get his team hitched to his wagon and make his escape.

   Ah, the good ol’ days — back before Trump vs USA, when a White House hustler could still actually be held responsible for his actions..

4. about 7 hours ago on WuMo

   1Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen. 2For by it the elders obtained a good report. 3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

   As bad an example of how to think, and so arrive at accurate conclusions, as I’ve ever seen. If there is a less accurate example of absence of epistemological soundness than what is stated in those three sentences, I have yet to encounter it (many other claims are tied with it for top billing, of course).

   If faith in a unfalsifiable/unevidenced assertion is all that is necessary for one to place their maximum veracity confidence level in that assertion (or even the least possible amount), then there is literally not a single possible asserted claim which cannot be accepted as absolutely corresponding with reality if one chooses to hope that their faith in that claim establishes absolute proof of its existence.

5. 1 day ago on Bottom Liners

   About time somebody turned things around and Right-back-at-ya’, scammer! on a Trump “product” they purchase.

6. 1 day ago on Non Sequitur

   The more easily/readily triggered the amygdala, the more conservative the human.

7. 1 day ago on Super-Fun-Pak Comix

   Uxorious

   A man who dotes on or really adores his wife is uxorious. Your uxorious grandfather, for example, might plan your grandmother’s surprise birthday party months in advance.

   Uxorious goes back to the Latin root ūxor, “wife,” and it came into English in the 16th century. Uxorious is usually negative, a way to show that a husband has too much concern for his wife or is submissive to her desires. It’s also an increasingly dated, old fashioned word, as a husband is considered uxorious if he lets his wife “control” him. There’s no corresponding adjective you can use of a wife “controlled” by her husband.

8. 1 day ago on Super-Fun-Pak Comix

   Gnomic

   A gnome is an aphorism—that is, an observation or sentiment reduced to the form of a saying. Gnomes are sometimes couched in metaphorical or figurative language, they are often quite clever, and they are always concise. We borrowed the word gnome in the 16th century from the Greeks, who based their gnome on the verb gignōskein, meaning “to know.” (The other gnome—referring to the dwarf of folklore—comes from New Latin and is unrelated to the aphoristic gnome.) We began using gnomic, the adjective form of gnome, in the late 18th century. It describes a style of writing, or sometimes speech, characterized by pithy phrases, which are often terse to the point of mysteriousness.

9. 2 days ago on La Cucaracha

   I don’t know what you hoped to convey with this remark, but if you think it is a positive example of any critical thinking acumen you believe you possess you missed that mark. By quite a long shot.

10. 2 days ago on Pearls Before Swine

    Fat chance of that, I expect.