People who do not understand the difference between an automatic weapon and a semiautomatic weapon. Double for journalists who put people on the air screaming for a ban on automatic weapons while not pointing out that automatic weapons are already illegal under Federal law.
Extra points for the journalist who yesterday acted shocked that the NRA actually supports enforcing the existing laws regarding prosecution for those who falsify background checks.
People who do not understand the difference between an automatic weapon and a semiautomatic weapon. Double for journalists who put people on the air screaming for a ban on automatic weapons while not pointing out that automatic weapons are already illegal under Federal law.
Extra points for the journalist who yesterday acted shocked that the NRA actually supports enforcing the existing laws regarding prosecution for those who falsify background checks.
Lawmakers and journalists know just as much about weapons technology as they do about computer technology.
Pet peeve = When media people make a huge deal out of the fact that they just made a segue. No you didn't. You almost did, then you stopped the flow of your show to pat yourself on the back.
Lawmakers and journalists know just as much about weapons technology as they do about computer technology.
Well, not ALL of them - there are a few good tech journalists out there, and there are a few journos that know weapons tech pretty well. But I'll agree, they're few and far between, especially regarding the latter.
Lawmakers that know either, let alone both, are most certainly a rare breed. Which personally baffles me - How can you presume yourself in anyway able to make reasonable, rational and logical legislation regarding topics you don't know anything about? I mean, sure, you can bring in an expert at the least, but not doing so, and refusing to learn anything about it, both are things that should make one strongly reconsider one's ability to make laws - you're clearly not in it to make worthwhile legislation, if that's the case.
Isn't there some sort of fine or penalty system in place to deal with media entities who spread misinformation and/or lies? Something more than slander/libel?
Because there is a difference between news and opinion?
I expect opinion shows to be biased and full of tortured and twisted feats of "logic". I also expect real "news" to be unbiased and based solely on facts. exceptions would exist for evolving stories but where the facts are known stating falsehoods as truths should fined.
Because there is a difference between news and opinion?
I expect opinion shows to be biased and full of tortured and twisted feats of "logic". I also expect real "news" to be unbiased and based solely on facts. exceptions would exist for evolving stories but where the facts are known stating falsehoods as truths should fined.
Again, how can FOX still be in business if there was? FOX often spreads opinion and other biased/libelous/dishonest crap in their news broadcasts. It's one thing if you have Hannity or Beck or whoever spewing crap. It's another thing when they're spewing crap on their regular news broadcasts, which they often do.
Of course they should be, but they aren't. Then again, they can just claim it's the "vast left-wing conspiracy shooting down their free speech rights," which basically gives them immunity. It also doesn't help that, as basically an admitted mouthpiece of the GOP, they have every GOP politician in the country backing them up should anything be done against them.
Incorrect usage of "UFO". It means "Unidentified Flying Object", not "flying object identified as an alien spacecraft".
Unfortunately, UFO has pretty much morphed these days to mean "alien spacecraft" instead of its original meaning. I kinda wish they kept the old "flying saucer" terminology for supposedly alien spacecraft. I'm okay with using "UFO" to represent random blips on a radar screen or strange stuff flying overhead that you can't figure out what it is, even if it's in all likelihood something mundane ranging from a misidentified star or planet (Venus is commonly mistake), to an experimental aircraft, to even the old excuse of weather balloon.
I don't get it. How do you ever mispronounce someone's first name?
I got to one of my girlfriends work parties before her a couple years ago. She sent me a text to go find her friend Kagnar and described what she was wearing. When I saw someone fitting the description I said "excuse me, are you" and I pronounced "kag nar"? She told me no, her name was "gone ya". I apologized and went to walk away, then she asked if I was Matt. Turns out her name sounds like "gone ya" but is spelled Kagnar.
I have many pet peves with the English language. #1 is words and names not sounding like how they are spelled.
Comments
>inb4 "Dylan was considered a sellout in his day"
Not by the Beatles, Hendrix, Morrison, etc.
EDIT: Looked at the other thread after Luke's post. Riffle is the same thing as what I was thinking of.
A: Folks who don't offer an opportunity to cut the deck in a competitive setting.
B: Folks who use Scarne's cut in a friendly game.
Also people who don't take the hint and over stay their welcome.
Extra points for the journalist who yesterday acted shocked that the NRA actually supports enforcing the existing laws regarding prosecution for those who falsify background checks.
Lawmakers that know either, let alone both, are most certainly a rare breed. Which personally baffles me - How can you presume yourself in anyway able to make reasonable, rational and logical legislation regarding topics you don't know anything about? I mean, sure, you can bring in an expert at the least, but not doing so, and refusing to learn anything about it, both are things that should make one strongly reconsider one's ability to make laws - you're clearly not in it to make worthwhile legislation, if that's the case.
I expect opinion shows to be biased and full of tortured and twisted feats of "logic". I also expect real "news" to be unbiased and based solely on facts. exceptions would exist for evolving stories but where the facts are known stating falsehoods as truths should fined.
I have many pet peves with the English language. #1 is words and names not sounding like how they are spelled.