Jenksismyhero

Just because: (look at the size of that dude's hand....Oh, and the hair)

Watched a really good documentary that I would recommend from HBO called "Manhunt: The Search for Bin Laden." As the name suggests, it covers the hunt for Bin Laden starting way back in the mid-90's up until his death, with a lot of good interviews with the original CIA intelligence team that tracked him, the "War on Terror" team, generals in Iraq/Afghanistan, etc. Good stuff. https://www.hbo.com/documentaries/manhunt-t...aden/index.html

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 11:59 AM) It's more that they were prosecuted for harming the baby. But it turns out drinking is much, much more harmful and yet we don't prosecute pregnant women who drink like we did with pregnant women who used crack. I thought you'd appreciate the first comment on the article, which is true: The obvious difference being that with crack use is always illegal but with alcohol it's not. But I'd be in favor of making it illegal/punishable to drink (excessively) while pregnant.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 11:42 AM) Bombing the s*** out of NK will result in 1) lots of dead NK's 2) lots of dead SK's, also possibly Japanese. Hundreds of thousands if not millions. I realize that. But at the same time we're also helping this f***er by giving him food, resources, money, etc. That's just wrong IMO.

I still think the only way they get a conviction would be because of reverse racism and the public trial Zimmerman had to go through in the media.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 11:03 AM) Pretty much, yeah. I still greatly prefer public regimes of power and accountability over private ones, though. How many realistic choices of operating systems are there? Mobile carriers? Food suppliers? Airlines? TV/Internet providers? Media sources and reliable journalism and investigation? Banks? We've got a zillion choices in the toothpaste aisle, but they're all from just a handful of manufacturers. And we're still not really left with any real amount of democratic control over what these companies do and how they do it. This would be analogous to every state having an unelected government but arguing that it's just as good because we can always just move to another state that we like better. e.g. banks: At the end of the day you still have a choice. And there are still hundreds if not thousands of local banks you can do business with.

So this is old but for some reason 60 minutes replayed it this last Sunday (yes, i'm 52 and like to watch 60 minutes) and I found it utterly amazing. They interviewed a guy that escaped from a North Korean labor camp. There's actually a thing called generational punishment there. This guys dad and grandfather fought in the Korean war, so they were put into a camp. As a "gift" for good behavior, his dad was able to "marry" his mom (kept separate, but allowed to see each other when a guard noted they exhibited good behavior). He was born in the camp and grew up there for the first 23 years of his life. The generational punishment is basically to kill of any lineage of someone that defied the supreme leader (even though odd that they're allowed to have kids in the camp). This kid saw some brutal stuff - kids being beaten to death for taking too many kernels of corn, people being executed on a routine basis and having to watch, etc. It's a complete mind trip since he had no idea what "love" meant. He had no idea what family actually meant. He said watching the executions was actually a good part of his day because it was something different. Turns out this guy actually turned his mother and brother in for some rules violation and they were executed (after he himself was tortured), and he felt no emotion about it at the time. He knew it was the "right" thing to do because of how he was brought up in the camp. Just an amazing story. http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50136263n I hate playing the world's police, but this s*** just can't be allowed in the world in 2013. We should be bombing the s*** out of every NK government building and liberating these people. I know realistically we can't, but it's pretty sickening that we continue to appease Kim Jung Un with food and supplies and whatnot when he's treating his people this way.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 10:47 AM) But they're not actually democratically accountable to anyone, and if they're big enough, you're pretty much forced to do business with one of a handful if you want to live in the modern world. Why are governments corrupt? Do corporations and the wealthy people that own and run them intentionally try to corrupt them in their favor as much as possible? How can we push back against this? As if the current set of politicians is democratically accountable. You have two parties that for all intents and purposes play the game the exact same way. The names in front of the letter might change here and there, but generally the same people stay in elected positions for the long term and the same policies get enacted. It's a completely broken system due in large part to factions and self-interest that some of the founding fathers recognized from day one. You have to sell your soul to become a politician. They're all corrupt, both morally and financially. What company is big enough that you can't choose to do business with it? Energy companies would be about the only one I can think of and yet most of them are heavily regulated but still "private" to some degree.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 10:42 AM) Corporate entities are a legal fiction that cannot exist without a government. Giving these fictional, government-created entities limited-liability protection is using the power of government to shield liability. Modern corporations are masters of this, as evidenced by Apple, and create shells and subsidiaries and firewalls all the time to get around actually being held accountable and responsible. I've never said government is bad. I just said I prefer the perspective to be that government intervention is a last resort. And LLC's have nothing to do with tax "accountability/responsibility." It's a vehicle to shield owners/managers from liability from their businesses. You can set up the same shells via partnerships and corporations.

http://www.thebiglead.com/index.php/2013/0...bout-moving-on/ OMG, now referring to fried chicken is racist. WTF. Also, what a dumb "controversy." Who cares about a Garcia/Woods feud?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 10:36 AM) big government is good, then? What does one have to do with the other?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 22, 2013 -> 06:37 AM) Agreed. Abolish the government-created limited liability corporation. And officially kill off any business in this litigation-heavy society? No thanks.

Jesus, do the refs know they can call a foul on the spurs? If memphis breathes on parker its called.

QUOTE (KyYlE23 @ May 21, 2013 -> 03:57 PM) there needs to be a jenks innovation in which you say "XBOX PLAY ONLY GOOD SHOWS" Lol, 99% of entertainment immediately rejected.

QUOTE (Athomeboy_2000 @ May 21, 2013 -> 03:24 PM) I hate people that publicize donations/charity work UNLESS it's done with the intent to bring exposure to a cause.

The TV stuff is interesting, but the gesture stuff is just annoying. Who the f*** wants to say "Xbox, on" or "Live TV" or waive their hands in the air like idiots when a remote control works perfectly fine? Spend some R&D money on some useful innovations please.

I think the box with half matte/have flat looks really stupid.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ May 21, 2013 -> 01:57 PM) Why do you think you'll be less f***ed if there's even less control on corporations? Because I can choose to be involved with those corporations? Obviously i'm not talking about getting rid of regulations or oversight or things like that totally, but as a general rule, i'd rather be able to pick and choose the private entities I do business with, even if they are corrupt, instead of being FORCED to deal with corrupt governments (hello Illinois citizens and Chicago residents!)

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 21, 2013 -> 01:09 PM) Do you really believe that legislators are crafting legislation which protects the best interests of the nation or are they crafting legislation which protects their personal best interests, reflecting in part the actual voters they have to face and in part the people who pay for their campaigns? Hey, when we all recognize how f***ed the system is we'll be better off and maybe we can fix our democracy. But your people continue to buy into the idea that government will save them and provide for them. You know, the same government that routinely f***s them. At least if a corporation is shady and corrupt I still have the choice to do business with them at the end of the day. I have no choice with government's involvement.

Lol, ah, so the "OMG LOOK HOW RACIST WE WERE IN THE 80's" was the true intent. And is prosecuting women who use crack a bad thing?

Ugh, these things are pricey. I figured bikes would cost like 100-200 bucks, not 500-600.

QUOTE (iamshack @ May 21, 2013 -> 10:28 AM) I tend to side with the folks who figure out the way to beat the system in these instances...this is on those who make the rules of the game, not the one who finds the flaws in those rules. Oh totally. I don't blame Apple at all for being smart. I don't think they have "personal responsibility" to pay money to the government because they have it. But I do have a problem with "i'm with main street, not wall street" politicians that clearly don't give a s*** about main street.

Yeah I had the same thought. Reading above, what kind of bikes do you guys have? I've been trying to get my wife and I outside and more active. We used to jog after work, but with a ~1 year old it's sort of a pain to keep that up. I've been thinking of grabbing us some bikes so that we can go do some trails once or twice a week. Any suggestions?

Interesting: http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/05/09/t...minute-workout/

That's the kind of s*** that needs to be fixed instead of raising taxes on the middle/lower class.