PILOT SPIN
Spin Zone => Spin Zone => Topic started by: Steingar on December 19, 2016, 01:38:22 PM
-
I got in trouble over this exam question:
The dumbest thing you can do with your money:
a. burn it
b. invest in a pyramid scheme
c. donate to the Trump foundation
d. hire a psychic
e. buy and smoke cigarettes.
-
I got in trouble over this exam question:
The dumbest thing you can do with your money:
a. burn it
b. invest in a pyramid scheme
c. donate to the Trump foundation
d. hire a psychic
e. buy and smoke cigarettes.
You left out f. Donate to the Hillary Clinton campaign.
-
You left out f. Donate to the Hillary Clinton campaign.
Isn't investing in a pyramid scheme and donating to the clinton campaign the same thing?
-
Isn't investing in a pyramid scheme and donating to the clinton campaign the same thing?
Well played Sir! Well played.....
-
I got in trouble over this exam question:
The dumbest thing you can do with your money:
a. burn it
b. invest in a pyramid scheme
c. donate to the Trump foundation
d. hire a psychic
e. buy and smoke cigarettes.
I'm assuming you believe them all to be equally dumb
(however, (a) and (e) would be extra special bad because of global warming) ;)
-
Isn't investing in a pyramid scheme and donating to the clinton campaign the same thing?
Hillary received over $1.2 Billion dollars from donors to finance her campaign. She spent all of it. Those donors, many foreign entities, are now PISSED that she didn't win, and their money was WASTED as they won't have the influence in the U.S. that they thought they'd have. I LOVE IT!
So, yes if you want to waste your money, you should have donated to Hillary, and/or the Clinton Foundation (money laundering scheme/pay to play). Well they PAID, but they're not going to PLAY. LOL!
-
(e) is the only one that will kill you.
-
Hey, he's back!
-
Hey Steingar.
-
Michael, you said you keep politics out of the classroom.
-
I got in trouble over this exam question:
The dumbest thing you can do with your money:
a. burn it
b. invest in a pyramid scheme
c. donate to the Trump foundation
d. hire a psychic
e. buy and smoke cigarettes.
Yeah... that's a tough one. At least with the psychic, there could be some entertainment value.
Nice to see you back!
-
Hillary received over $1.2 Billion dollars from donors to finance her campaign. She spent all of it. Those donors, many foreign entities, are now PISSED that she didn't win, and their money was WASTED as they won't have the influence in the U.S. that they thought they'd have. I LOVE IT!
The same could be said for anyone who contributed to a losing candidate... so what is your point??
-
Must be e). Answers a) through d) pretty much amount to the same thing.
-
Michael, you said you keep politics out of the classroom.
Yep, that's an odd question for a science test.
-
Hillary received over $1.2 Billion dollars from donors to finance her campaign. She spent all of it. Those donors, many foreign entities, are now PISSED that she didn't win, and their money was WASTED as they won't have the influence in the U.S. that they thought they'd have. I LOVE IT!
So, yes if you want to waste your money, you should have donated to Hillary, and/or the Clinton Foundation (money laundering scheme/pay to play). Well they PAID, but they're not going to PLAY. LOL!
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/14963160_623101051227216_4523280372843723678_n_zpsrhom79by.png)
-
The same could be said for anyone who contributed to a losing candidate... so what is your point??
With all due respect Gary, my point is that Hillary, and the Democrats make a BIG deal out of social, and economic justice, yet turn around and accept money from foreign donors, some of them enemies, or potential enemies of the United States and work on their behalf to influence U.S. policy. And you are OK with that???
Their hypocrisy speaks volumes.
-
Michael, you said you keep politics out of the classroom.
I mostly do. That's about as close as I come. Actually, I have to take it back. When talking about Genetics I start the subject with some general descriptors, let my students know what they're getting into using the attached slides.
-
I mostly do. That's about as close as I come. Actually, I have to take it back. When talking about Genetics I start the subject with some general descriptors, let my students know what they're getting into using the attached slides.
So now 2 examples of how you bring politics into your classroom.
More likely even more than that.
-
So now 2 examples of how you bring politics into your classroom.
More likely even more than that.
Michael is a good guy. We need an opposing point of view. :)
I think many teachers, and professors allow their progressive bias to bleed into their classrooms. Often, I believe it is unintentional, but sometimes I am sure it is intentional.
Michael, when you are ready, I'd like to hear your PIO story. Remember, as a Grumman driver I know the drill.
-
Michael is a good guy. We need an opposing point of view. :)
I think many teachers, and professors allow their progressive bias to bleed into their classrooms. Often, I believe it is unintentional, but sometimes I am sure it is intentional.
Michael, when you are ready, I'd like to hear your PIO story. Remember, as a Grumman driver I know the drill.
But we have been told he teaches science and never discusses politics or brings politics into his classroom........then we see two examples of it being done.
-
But we have been told he teaches science and never discusses politics or brings politics into his classroom........then we see two examples of it being done.
Nobody is perfect. I hear ya.
-
Michael is a good guy. We need an opposing point of view. :)
I think many teachers, and professors allow their progressive bias to bleed into their classrooms. Often, I believe it is unintentional, but sometimes I am sure it is intentional.
Michael, when you are ready, I'd like to hear your PIO story. Remember, as a Grumman driver I know the drill.
more important would be whether or not he gives lower grades to conservatives and anyone who doesn't buy into his liberal BS.
-
I was going to put a photo of myself in the last slide, but it seems too much like hubris to compare myself to Einstein. That, and I have very cleverly avoided having photos taken of me doing anything really stupid.
In the end I decided that saying someone was a slightly less intelligent than Einstein is no insult. So at least I get something out of the fiasco that was the 2016 Presidential election. Throw me a frikken bone for Odin's sake!
-
(http://i1077.photobucket.com/albums/w464/flybywire1959/14963160_623101051227216_4523280372843723678_n_zpsrhom79by.png)
I'm sure they're just as pissed as the many contractors and workers who lost their shirts working for Trump Inc as he executed his brilliant bankruptcies making his shareholders (ie. the Trump family) hundreds of millions of dollars (or not, since we don't know as he will never release his tax returns).
-
I'm sure they're just as pissed as the many contractors and workers who lost their shirts working for Trump Inc as he executed his brilliant bankruptcies making his shareholders (ie. the Trump family) hundreds of millions of dollars (or not, since we don't know as he will never release his tax returns).
Why does the various states have bankruptcy laws in the first place? Are you implying even though the laws on on the books, and businesses as well as individuals use these laws, that somehow they are illegal?
-
The same could be said for anyone who contributed to a losing candidate... so what is your point??
That IS the point. If your candidate loses you lost all influence you might have purchased which made it a dumb way to waste money. Duh.
-
Why does the various states have bankruptcy laws in the first place? Are you implying even though the laws on on the books, and businesses as well as individuals use these laws, that somehow they are illegal?
Nope. He means that anything... ANYTHING that a conservative does, thinks, doesn't do, or doesn't think is evil and any pretense of objectivity is totally accidental on his part.
-
I mostly do. That's about as close as I come. Actually, I have to take it back. When talking about Genetics I start the subject with some general descriptors, let my students know what they're getting into using the attached slides.
Ow! Micro aggression! I'm offended. I need a safe space! Where's my comfort puppy?
-
Ow! Micro aggression! I'm offended. I need a safe space! Where's my comfort puppy?
Here's a little German Shorthaired Pointer for you (my favorite breed)
(http://i672.photobucket.com/albums/vv83/mjmixell_81/German%20Shorthaired%20Pointer%20puppies/Updatedpuppies021_zps4feb19a8.jpg) (http://media.photobucket.com/user/mjmixell_81/media/German%20Shorthaired%20Pointer%20puppies/Updatedpuppies021_zps4feb19a8.jpg.html)
-
Ow! Micro aggression! I'm offended. I need a safe space! Where's my comfort puppy?
That's Ok little one. Michael or one of his peers will be along with play-doh, crayons and a bankee any minute now.
-
Maybe Steingar is putting us on. Maybe he has too much class to actually do that stuff in a classroom.
-
Maybe Steingar is putting us on. Maybe he has too much class to actually do that stuff in a classroom.
Not putting you on. The test question might have been a little much, I thought I'd get away with it due to the obvious jocularity. The photo of the Orange one stays. Like I said, saying someone is slightly less intelligent than Einstein is no insult.
Other than that I do not do politics in the classroom unless it directly impacts the subject matter. For example, when talking about Stem cells I do talk about the Bush-directed ban on money for human stem cells. They're a really interesting story all themselves.
My problem with this is we're ignoring inclusivity. A University shouldn't be an echo chamber like this website. Students should be exposed to ideas with which they are not only unfamiliar but perhaps uncomfortable. I'd call the test question my bad since it unnecessarily involved the Orange One. But it was pretty seriously mild, and shouldn't have drawn any cries of fowl. It was actually quite an honest comment, the Orange One himself hasn't contributed to that thing in nearly a decade.
But instead we're PC'ing our universities half to death. What we professors say is so carefully scrutinized, I could tell you more than a few stories. Just the other day I had local businessman told me he will never again hire a college graduate. He says they'e too PC, too whiny and too easily offended. Not the first time I've heard this comment either. But where doe sit come from? Notice that you guys are jumping down my throat for the least little infraction. You're surprised my students act similarly?
We truly are not doing our students any services by speaking so punctiliously. The World doesn't, and we're supposed to be preparing them for it.
-
so in fairness, you also poke a little fun at Hillary?
-
so in fairness, you also poke a little fun at Hillary?
Oh, of course he does!
-
I would happily if I thought I could get away with it. The beauty of free speech is we can poke fun at the folks in charge. Again, we've PC'd ourselves so badly that I doubt I could without twisting someone's knickers into a wad. I got reamed for a minor joke about he Trump foundation, which itself is a joke!
-
Not putting you on. The test question might have been a little much, I thought I'd get away with it due to the obvious jocularity. The photo of the Orange one stays. Like I said, saying someone is slightly less intelligent than Einstein is no insult.
And I'm sure that's the way you meant it. I can't imagine that you intended any sarcasm.
-
With all due respect Gary, my point is that Hillary, and the Democrats make a BIG deal out of social, and economic justice, yet turn around and accept money from foreign donors, some of them enemies, or potential enemies of the United States and work on their behalf to influence U.S. policy. And you are OK with that???
Their hypocrisy speaks volumes.
Are you speaking to Hillary Presidential campaign donations or donations to the Clinton Foundation?
I am no fan of Hillary and the fact she is NOT President is not a disappointment. At the national level, money flows from various sources, often difficult to trace. It is a bipartisan effort. To say the Dems or the Reps are squeaky clean is an outright lie. All of those people who give money are either in support of a candidates position or looking for access/influence to sway government officials to their position.
-
Are you speaking to Hillary Presidential campaign donations or donations to the Clinton Foundation?
I am no fan of Hillary and the fact she is NOT President is not a disappointment. At the national level, money flows from various sources, often difficult to trace. It is a bipartisan effort. To say the Dems or the Reps are squeaky clean is an outright lie. All of those people who give money are either in support of a candidates position or looking for access/influence to sway government officials to their position.
Please indicate which Republicans took money from foreign governments like the Clintons did.
-
Please indicate which Republicans took money from foreign governments like the Clintons did.
Again, are you speaking to the Clinton Presidential campaign or the Clinton Foundation. Foreign money flowing to a presidential campaign is most certainly a problem. Foreign contributions to the Clinton Foundation are perfectly legal.
-
That IS the point. If your candidate loses you lost all influence you might have purchased which made it a dumb way to waste money. Duh.
That's why Trump has often said he contributed to everyone so that no matter who won an election, he had them beholden to him. Everything you criticize the Dems for can be said for Reps and DT has made no secret that bribery and corruption are parts of his business model.
-
That's why Trump has often said he contributed to everyone so that no matter who won an election, he had them beholden to him. Everything you criticize the Dems for can be said for Reps and DT has made no secret that bribery and corruption are parts of his business model.
He didn't create the rules but he did live by them. They were not "his business model". It was the model he had to work with, and he worked it well.
-
He didn't create the rules but he did live by them. They were not "his business model". It was the model he had to work with, and he worked it well.
I disagree. Many businessmen have made fortunes without bribery and bankruptcy. You seem to condone any behavior as long as it profits.
-
Welcome back Steingar, this place has been less interesting without you.
-
Not putting you on. The test question might have been a little much, I thought I'd get away with it due to the obvious jocularity. The photo of the Orange one stays. Like I said, saying someone is slightly less intelligent than Einstein is no insult.
Other than that I do not do politics in the classroom unless it directly impacts the subject matter. For example, when talking about Stem cells I do talk about the Bush-directed ban on money for human stem cells. They're a really interesting story all themselves.
My problem with this is we're ignoring inclusivity. A University shouldn't be an echo chamber like this website. Students should be exposed to ideas with which they are not only unfamiliar but perhaps uncomfortable. I'd call the test question my bad since it unnecessarily involved the Orange One. But it was pretty seriously mild, and shouldn't have drawn any cries of fowl. It was actually quite an honest comment, the Orange One himself hasn't contributed to that thing in nearly a decade.
But instead we're PC'ing our universities half to death. What we professors say is so carefully scrutinized, I could tell you more than a few stories. Just the other day I had local businessman told me he will never again hire a college graduate. He says they'e too PC, too whiny and too easily offended. Not the first time I've heard this comment either. But where doe sit come from? Notice that you guys are jumping down my throat for the least little infraction. You're surprised my students act similarly?
We truly are not doing our students any services by speaking so punctiliously. The World doesn't, and we're supposed to be preparing them for it.
Your pious claims are invalid and self-serving. The fact that you felt perfectly at home attacking Trump but wouldn't DARE criticize, or make a funny at Hilary's expense say it all.
-
Are you speaking to Hillary Presidential campaign donations or donations to the Clinton Foundation?
I am no fan of Hillary and the fact she is NOT President is not a disappointment. At the national level, money flows from various sources, often difficult to trace. It is a bipartisan effort. To say the Dems or the Reps are squeaky clean is an outright lie. All of those people who give money are either in support of a candidates position or looking for access/influence to sway government officials to their position.
I am speaking of both. Legal doesn't mean it is right. Do you want foreign governments, and entities dictating U.S. policy?
-
I got in trouble over this exam question:
The dumbest thing you can do with your money:
a. burn it
b. invest in a pyramid scheme
c. donate to the Trump foundation
d. hire a psychic
e. buy and smoke cigarettes.
I'm a little surprised you would get in any trouble for this and somewhat disappointed. I think one should be allowed to joke about our politicians - of ALL persuasions. I would prefer that there be no blowback from this, nor from poking fun at Hillary.
There is no right to not be offended and college students need to grow up.
-
I'm a little surprised you would get in any trouble for this and somewhat disappointed. I think one should be allowed to joke about our politicians - of ALL persuasions. I would prefer that there be no blowback from this, nor from poking fun at Hillary.
There is no right to not be offended and college students need to grow up.
They also deserve a fair and balanced presentation from their university.
-
I am speaking of both. Legal doesn't mean it is right. Do you want foreign governments, and entities dictating U.S. policy?
I don't want it. But how do you propose that it be stopped? Suspend the 1st Amendment and allow the government to decide which speech is appropriate? Have the government form cyber hit squads to take out the foreign websites that are posting the wrong stuff? Cut the US internet off from the rest of the world? Maybe not so extreme and we should just be like China and block individual sites that are offensive to the government?
Because we live in a global world, we will get global communications. It's up to us to choose a Congress and a President who won't be influenced. Like we have now.
-
...we're ignoring inclusivity. A University shouldn't be an echo chamber like this website. Students should be exposed to ideas with which they are not only unfamiliar but perhaps uncomfortable. ...
But instead we're PC'ing our universities half to death. What we professors say is so carefully scrutinized, I could tell you more than a few stories. Just the other day I had local businessman told me he will never again hire a college graduate. He says they'e too PC, too whiny and too easily offended. Not the first time I've heard this comment either.
I can see why you got in trouble. Welcome to the white/male/non-PC club.
-
Yes, Michael, we are PCing our Universities to death but it is ALWAYS PC with the liberal/progressive viewpoint in mind, and in control. There is no "PC" when it comes to conservatives. They are fair game to be ridiculed, insulted, hung in effage, not allowed to speak, etc. It is utter, blatant HYPOCRICY.
-
Students should be exposed to ideas with which they are not only unfamiliar but perhaps uncomfortable.
*snip*
But instead we're PC'ing our universities half to death. What we professors say is so carefully scrutinized, I could tell you more than a few stories. Just the other day I had local businessman told me he will never again hire a college graduate. He says they'e too PC, too whiny and too easily offended. Not the first time I've heard this comment either. But where doe sit come from?
It seems to me that colleges and universities have gone from places where kids are exposed to new ideas to a place where they are coddled. And the coddling seems to come more from the soft sciences part of universities, which tend to be more liberal. Safe places? Since when do universities need to have safe places?
And this all plays into the whole wussification of not only American males, but all American young. Our enemies are wining.
-
The thin-skinned uber sensitive culture that we see in the collegiate atmosphere is not unique to that area. It's prevalent in most aspects of our society. Here's a theory.
During the Depression, younger folks faced serious calamity and the real prospect of starvation. Then came WWII and the birth of the Greatest Generation. These folks gave birth to the Baby Boomers, who in turn also faced calamity during the Cold War and Vietnam. After Vietnam the Baby Boomers got down and created Generation X, who in turn have spawned Millenials. Generation Y. Generations X and Y saw the birth of the Internet, the death of the Cold War, and reaped the rewards of those who sacrificed in previous generations.
We now live in a time where individuals don't need to know things, they just need to know how to find the information. And that information is so readily available that even the laziest slobs can figure stuff out. There isn't much need for folks to know how to hunt, or fish, or protect themselves. It's now ensured that those needs (food, shelter, protection) can easily be met.
No strife, no real calamity, no prospect of major loss of life. So, life becomes boring. And bored people make shit up to not be bored. Hence the drama. So, things that didn't bother people before (because they had bigger problems to worry about) now are an issue.
Of course, I'm generalizing a lot here, and I'm purposefully not being 100% accurate in social generational history. But then this exercise wouldn't be fun.
Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!
-
The thin-skinned uber sensitive culture that we see in the collegiate atmosphere is not unique to that area. It's prevalent in most aspects of our society. Here's a theory.
During the Depression, younger folks faced serious calamity and the real prospect of starvation. Then came WWII and the birth of the Greatest Generation. These folks gave birth to the Baby Boomers, who in turn also faced calamity during the Cold War and Vietnam. After Vietnam the Baby Boomers got down and created Generation X, who in turn have spawned Millenials. Generation Y. Generations X and Y saw the birth of the Internet, the death of the Cold War, and reaped the rewards of those who sacrificed in previous generations.
We now live in a time where individuals don't need to know things, they just need to know how to find the information. And that information is so readily available that even the laziest slobs can figure stuff out. There isn't much need for folks to know how to hunt, or fish, or protect themselves. It's now ensured that those needs (food, shelter, protection) can easily be met.
No strife, no real calamity, no prospect of major loss of life. So, life becomes boring. And bored people make shit up to not be bored. Hence the drama. So, things that didn't bother people before (because they had bigger problems to worry about) now are an issue.
Of course, I'm generalizing a lot here, and I'm purposefully not being 100% accurate in social generational history. But then this exercise wouldn't be fun.
Sent from my iPad . Squirrel!!
It's Bush's fault.