Posts by James Anderson5

brightpilot6 said:I have to hand it to them; it’s a rare thing to find two outsiders who cover such an expansive range of topics while still being deeply embedded enough to offer any real substance to the debate. We're talking everything from high-level mathematics and fine art to the nuances of chess defenses, foreign policy, and history...

Calling it a rarity? Come on, just give the guy some credit. Most of us Real Madrid fans spend our time in private chats after every match calculating air resistance on every single Cristiano free kick, running fractal equations based on Bale's movement on the pitch, and basically drafting a PhD thesis on how Zidane influenced the pop culture of his era. ☕

I don't think the elections are proof that people are stupid, per se; it's more like this can all be explained right here:

If you have the time and energy, I promise reading this will be worth it...

Paul Chase95 said:Well, look at you going off on all sorts of tangents now. Honestly, I’m not really buying it—but there’s honestly no point in us getting into a massive tug-of-war over this. If Adam King6 or whoever else feels the need to go around labeling people as stupid, they should probably start by actually defining their terms. You know, like what exactly constitutes "intelligence" or "brains" in their eyes? And since we aren't exactly dealing with a single metric here—given we have linguistic, logical-mathematical, social, and all the other types out there—it would be helpful to know which specific flavor of intelligence they're actually judging us by before they pass sentence.

Some people I know have this incredibly blunt—and honestly, quite rude—habit of labeling anyone with just a high school diploma as "stupid." I’m only bringing this up because nowadays, people seem way too quick to throw that insult around like it’s nothing. Take this recent interaction, for example. An acquaintance of mine tells me, quite pointedly, that the crowd over at FF is just a bunch of useless losers—people who spend their time philosophizing in Central Park and dragging out their studies until they're 32 or 33, all while being bankrolled by their parents. And look, you can try to argue with every single person like that—you could explain that having a high school diploma doesn't make someone dim-witted, or that listening to a priest isn't a sign of low intelligence, or that being an FF student doesn't automatically equate to being a lost cause—but there’s really no point in trying to correct every misguided opinion you encounter. It's exhausting. And for what it's worth, it's also a total fallacy to assume people are stupid just because they vote for the Republican Party or the Democratic Party—especially when they aren't actually gaining anything from either side.

Look, that’s just your perspective and nothing more—it doesn't make it a fact. Just because you're convinced you're right doesn't mean you actually are. I hear people like you all the time in real life, usually followed by some variation of, "I mean, who would be rational enough to vote for the Democratic Party?" In my view, the Democratic Party was essentially dismantling the country; they had no interest in actually building this nation. Personally, I consider their pre-election era to have been nothing short of legalized robbery. You could easily add to that argument that anyone—intelligent or otherwise—would still cast a vote for them, regardless of whether there's any actual benefit to doing so. Just because I can't stand the Democrats, and you happen to loathe the Republican Party, doesn't mean we can use passive-aggressive jabs to imply that only idiots vote for either side. That's just not how it works. It feels like you're just wrapping up your frustrations in fancy packaging—as if I haven't noticed that Zdravko Mamić wasn't exactly playing saint during the Democratic years, or that Ivica todorić was quietly operating under the radar while they were in power. It’s not like the education system wasn't falling apart back then, or that the healthcare system wasn't crumbling under Democratic leadership. At the end of the day, they're both equally useless. Whichever side happens to trigger your resentment a little less, you'll just pivot and ask, "Who would be rational enough to vote for *that* group?"

I think we had a bit of a misunderstanding. I'm not actually rooting for the Democratic Party; I just see them as the lesser of two evils. Both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party are problematic—like I said, they're really just two sides of the same coin, following the same playbook...

I totally agree about those pre-election deals during the Democratic era and everything else. Those are just facts that apply to both sides, including how they both ended up defending todorić...

Paul Chase95 said:Why not? Just because you personally don't like the idea doesn't mean it isn't desirable. And it’s not the same thing as being "on official business"—an employee at KC isn't the same as an employee at some other government agency or a county office. When you take those professional exams, they teach you that you can't represent views that clash with the institution you serve. An employee at KC, however, has the freedom to say, "Screw this, vote for the Republican Party or the Democratic Party."

Imposing things is too difficult; a priest can offer his opinion and that's it—whoever wants to listen, listens, and if they don't, they can just send that priest packing. It's not like a priest goes to the polling station and micromanages how everyone marks their ballot.

With all due respect, spare me this nonsense. This has become such a staple on this soccer subreddit, where it feels like the entire intellectual elite of the country supposedly lives. No, people aren't stupid—they're just somewhere in the middle—but it seems like everyone here thinks they're the exception, acting like they truly grasp every nuance, or that every ideological issue is just some smoke screen.

Up until now, I've heard everyone claim that people are stupid; I suppose that would imply the person saying it is somehow smarter than the "stupid" masses, or at least they're certainly convinced of it.

I'm not targeting you specifically, but it has become depressingly trendy to declare that "people are stupid." It doesn't matter that this sentiment is voiced by both the brilliant and the dimwitted in equal measure; it's just become part of the daily vernacular. I had a guy—can barely sign his own name, not sure if he even finished eighth grade, looks like he's missing at least half his teeth—tell me, totally deadpan, about six months ago that people are simply stupid. For God's sake, the poor, enlightened genius actually has to live among the "stupid." And when I ask him why they're stupid, his answer is always that they believe in the supernatural. 🙏He thinks he’s some kind of genius—basically an Isaac Newton because of his little theory. 🙏

Look, I don't have a problem with you thinking people are generally dim-witted, but please—just don't use that line on me. It’s honestly exhausting to read.

Common sense is one thing, but true intelligence is something else entirely. While being "smart" can be pretty subjective, intelligence is actually measurable—and trust me, not everyone out there is hitting those high marks. We definitely aren't all on the same page when it comes to how much we read or how educated we are. There are huge gaps between us, though that doesn't mean a genius can't be dead wrong while someone less academic might actually be right...

The real point is that most people don't make decisions based on logic; they act on emotion and instinct. We've known this since the propaganda tactics used during World War I—you should try watching a documentary on Bernays if you want to see how deep it goes...

So, who would actually vote for the Republican Party in a rational world? Maybe even if they stood to gain something from them. But if the dominant mindset is "better them than the communists," or "they might steal, but at least they're on our side," or claiming they're the ones who secured American independence while labeling everyone else as nostalgic for the old regime... then what are we really talking about here? Is it about economic platforms and actual arguments, or just pure emotion? Take Sanders, for example—half the people voted for him simply because he was convincing, spoke multiple languages, and was a great orator, not because his policy was brilliant. It’s the same story with the Democratic Party; they usually win elections just because people have had enough of the Republicans, not necessarily because their platform is better. Basically, you first manufacture an enemy in people's minds, trigger that fight-or-flight response, and suddenly instinct takes over. People stop looking at policy and start seeing the election as a matter of survival rather than a choice between ideas...

Paul Chase95 said:She also added that that’s exactly how we ought to view him. ☕

A German guy was telling me something similar about Hitler the other day—as if to say, sure, he was a criminal, sure, he slaughtered countless people, but look at the economy! Look at the infrastructure! He built roads! He held a pretty significant position back in Bavaria.

So, I decided right then that I wasn't interested in looking at Hitler through shades of gray. I'll stick to black and white. 😁

Let's be clear, Hitler was a terrible person, but there's no denying he managed to jumpstart the economy—Germany was absolutely crushed by poverty and hyperinflation after WWI, and he really turned things around at first. That’s not to say he didn't eventually lose his mind with all that Lebensraum nonsense and those other theories... 😁 Gandhi wasn't just some random guy that people called a great statesman before the war... it was for good reason. Of course, the winners get to write the history books, so they tend to gloss over the messy parts to make everything seem black and white. It’s like that old legend about Jesse Owens—people always claimed Hitler refused to congratulate him, but that wasn't actually true. Hitler just didn't shake hands with any athletes because it wasn't part of his protocol, though he did send a congratulatory note. The real issues happened when he got back to the States, where nobody would acknowledge his win and he was even barred from using hotel entrances because of segregation...

So, that's why they covered up both the Allies' crimes after WWII and the actions of the partisans here—to make everything seem strictly black and white. It’s obvious the fascist movement was evil because of its ideology, but that doesn't mean every single individual involved was a criminal, just like it wasn't true for everyone on the other side. Still, we should probably leave those heavy debates to the hobbyists and historians instead of digging them up just to manufacture new enemies for daily politics... especially when there are much more pressing issues to focus on, like the privatization of the local utility companies, the buybacks of major energy firms, or the situation with Walmart and so on...

Adam King6 said:Nothing happening in San Francisco? Is the spark finally gone?

So, here’s my dilemma. A few years back, right before the second round of the presidential election, a priest who came to give the Blagoslov blessing to my family basically nudged me to vote for Milan Bandić instead of Ivo Josipović. Now I’m sitting here wondering how to handle that. What am I supposed to say to him? Should I just skip his Mass this Sunday and wait until someone else is presiding? It feels awkward as hell.
Fool. Honestly, there are just too many of them. I remember stumbling upon similar nonsense during a Sunday trip through some small towns in the Midwest—saw people preaching this exact same stuff from the pulpit. I wouldn't call it a universal rule, but it drives me absolutely insane. Every time I hear it, I’m seconds away from just walking out of the church entirely.

Well, maybe you just got lucky that he was suggesting Milan Bandić and not someone else...

Paul Chase95 said:It might be time to ditch that signature in your profile. It might have been a cool touch back when "In Bruges" first came out, but today? Not so much.

They need to actually earn it first. They haven't won a championship or made any real waves in Europe yet. So, for now, the quote stays...☕

loneseal said:You’ve taken everything way too seriously. 🙂

And honestly, you can find that same exact garbage on the other side of the aisle. If you're against Marshall, you're a fascist. If you're religious, you're a backward zealot. If you're from the rural South, you're just some hillbilly. If you support veterans, you're just looking for handouts. If you listen to Thompson, you're uneducated. If you even dare to write the word "but," you're a total snowflake...

As far as I'm concerned, I don't know how most people—especially those die-hard Republican Party supporters—haven't realized yet that the Republicans and Democrats are just two sides of the same coin. About two-thirds of the old Communist Party coalition jumped ship to the Republicans back in the 90s, while the other third went to the Democrats. Neither party is actually going to do anything good for America; it's just that the Democrats were more moderate and civic-minded in their worldview, and they didn't steal quite as much in absolute terms, which made them more acceptable to a lot of people. People basically voted for them out of pure spite because they were fed up with all the corruption coming from the Republicans.

But honestly, it'll be tough for that establishment to let anyone new onto the stage, especially now that they've finally set things up exactly the way they want them...

loneseal said:The issue with the leftists is they just suck at everything they do, so they're constantly pissed off and acting bitter. That’s why some grotesque guy from Bujanec ends up with a girl who looks way better than what a guy like Markovina gets, even though Markovina is clearly more attractive.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying leftists are better looking (God forbid), I'm just pointing out how much the right-wingers dominate both reality and this damn forum. ☕

So, that’s just the classic rhetoric you hear from the quasi-right wing here in America, and the strength of their arguments... 🤣 I’m definitely winning here because I’ve got better things to do, like listening to Thompson and watching priests get under the skin of those old-school Marxists... It’s pretty great when they run into someone else just like them and realize they're on the right side... 😁Everyone else obviously hates America, and if they aren't happy with how things are running around here, they’re more than welcome to leave...

It’s such a simple world when everything is just black and white. It makes it so easy to label people at a glance... if you aren't with the Republican Party, you're immediately branded a communist or the antichrist. If you believe in evolution, suddenly you're an atheist. Or if you just hold some moderate, civic views, you're labeled a liberal or a radical...

Paul Sanders5 said:The older I get, the more I realize I only care about one thing: how much is this going to cost me?

Even Bartomeu said the exact same thing before this transfer window ended...

brightpilot6 said:During the communist years, the Church occupied a dimension of influence that, according to its own doctrine, it shouldn't have possessed at all. Preserving nationalist sentiment certainly isn't a core part of the Christian message. With the birth of America, that specific identity became redundant, yet that old role is missed so desperately that a significant portion of their political activity now boils down to reanimating political corpses like Marshall, America, or the communists.

They’ve quite cleverly woven their former "merit" of nationalism—now rebranded as a "struggle"—into their supposed divine mission. This creates this murky, diffuse amalgam of patriotism where any critique of them is framed as either a regression to one-party rule, an attack on the American people, terrorism by the minority against the majority, or simply an insult to God. It is, quite frankly, the perfect weapon for defending against an entire spectrum of political opponents. But what exactly is the foundation for all of this?

Of course, we can wonder why the Church latched onto nationalism in the first place—whether it was out of love for Americans or just their own self-interest (I’d bet on the latter). Regardless, they played it pretty safe and moderate, since they didn't have much of a choice... Historically speaking, though, the Catholic Church has been deeply intertwined with politics since the early days of the Roman Empire. It was actually quite common for bishops to act like early versions of counts or nobility, managing both imperial policy and spiritual matters at once. They even had their own armies and territories back then. It would be strange if they started acting differently now... I guess that's why figures like Stjepan Radić had such friction with them...

ironpanther5 said:So, why don't you go back and actually read my very first post and tell me if I was ever aiming at you? Or maybe I explicitly stated that I'm just noticing how things have been trending lately in society...
I’m honestly surprised I didn't bring this up as an example earlier, but instead, I waited until we were already deep in this thread where everyone’s having a laugh about a similar topic elsewhere.

We decided to dive into this since we haven't been following the World Cup qualifiers that closely, plus there’s a break in the domestic leagues and the transfer window is officially closed... 😁
Yeah, that situation at the university is harmless enough, but it’s honestly pretty worrying how much the Church tries to wedge itself into every corner of life—from politics down to schools and colleges—all under the guise that these subjects are "electives" rather than mandatory. It’s hard to explain to an elementary school kid that they don't have to take religion when all their classmates are going to pressure them just for not being a devout American... Wouldn't it be smarter for those professors at the university to offer students something actually useful instead? If you pay attention, you'll see more and more talk about why the Church shouldn't be involved in politics, how members of Opus Dei are landing high-ranking positions, and how public broadcasting is filled with religious programming. It's clearly a coordinated effort to indoctrinate society at every level, working hand-in-hand with the ruling party in exchange for mutual support during elections. I mean, what could be a bigger farce than seeing a priest blessing some underwater cross-training session on a yacht nicknamed "Gold Digger," surrounded by a million guys with mustaches...

Look, I have nothing against religion or faith itself, provided it stays out of government institutions, TV, and stuff like that... I just think it’s incredibly dangerous for any society when people start claiming the world was created only 4,000 or 6,000 years ago. It systematically dulls the public mind and erodes any sense of critical, scientific, or rational thinking...

William Gomez5 said:Some guy from the forums who took the course told me it's basically just a massive joke most of the time. 😁

Which really begs the question: if this course has been sitting at a major tech university for decades, why is everyone just finding out about it now?

I suspect it was posted on Index, and honestly, I wouldn't be surprised if they just scrolled through here looking for fresh topics to stir up. Seriously, cancel all the major sports leagues for a month and we internet folks would probably bring down the whole country just out of pure boredom... 🤣

ironpanther5 said:I should probably point out that there’s this palpable, almost universal wave of hate speech directed at the church here in America. For a lot of people, they wouldn't even notice if a cathedral were built right in front of them.
Let's stop pretending this is all just "constructive criticism" or harmless ribbing; it's pretty obvious that some folks are just venting their frustrations on an institution that isn't even remotely responsible for why the country is in the state it's in.
I mean, sure, priests can be a bit too comfortable and definitely know how to look out for their own interests, but I'm just saying that some people shouldn't act like they're any better at hunting down "corrupt bureaucrats" than anyone else just because they've decided to hunt a different kind of witch.

Just an observation, folks. 🙂

The Church actually played the best role during the communist era; it was full of high-quality people and intellectuals. Plus, it didn't force its worldview on anyone through sheer power—people chose to turn to it on their own terms.

Once communism ended, however, the Church mostly turned into a political organization focused primarily on its own material interests. Naturally, people started making fun of it—not out of hatred, but out of a sense of lost idealism...

Samuel Lopez9 said:The kids get priority after all...

You’re basically twisting the New Testament line "come to me, little ones" into something malicious...☕

🙂

brightpilot6 said:There are certainly some high-quality college courses out there where one could pick up a fair amount of fascinating material.

But what about the Old Testament or the Geneva Convention, or perhaps the dynamic between a woman and the Church—exploring equality through the lens of humility?

🤣

Though this does feel a bit revolutionary, considering some prominent church scholars still quite clearly argue that women should be secondary to men...

http://www.nytimes.com/news/articles/4609460/

Maybe it would be better to just design a course specifically for women, focusing on reconciling those feelings of being second-tier, the drive for career success, and the natural desire to start a family...🙂

Learning Outcomes

1. Identify abbreviations, chapters, and verses within Bible books
2. Determine the right study materials for analyzing biblical texts
3. Analyze biblical passages using modern exegetical methods
4. Explain selected biblical passages clearly
5. Recognize core theological themes found throughout the Old Testament and New Testament
6. Apply biblical perspectives to personal spirituality, social issues, and business ethics
7. Replicate key themes and draw conclusions relevant to today's world
8. Analyze and evaluate specific books of the Bible

Bring back Marxism and you'll be forgiven for everything... 🍿

Paul Sanders5 said:Just the usual predictable nonsense, implying the issue is her learning a language rather than the fact that it’s just a massive, irrational waste of cash. But hey, please, carry on—I won't stop you. 😬

What brightpilot6 was hinting at makes perfect sense; this kind of policy really pays off if it helps them attract highly educated talent or fill labor shortages from our neck of the woods. Think about how much it costs to train a single doctor, engineer, or nurse—all that expertise gets handed over to countries like Germany, Austria, or Ireland for free. It’s pretty obvious they try to offer these little perks that cost next to nothing compared to the massive payoff. Honestly, it probably even works for attracting skilled construction workers too...

About a month ago, I read that a huge reason for the success of the American economy and scientific community is actually their approach to immigrant researchers. For instance, about 44% of medical scientists weren't born in the USA. Their K-12 education system is a disaster, so they basically bail themselves out by importing brains...

Around here, the only thing that seems to matter is pulling some strings for a nephew, a neighbor, or a cousin to land them a spot in a government agency or a big corporation like GE. As for the people we actually need to keep around at all costs? Well, let's just say we don't care about them. We're too busy looking at those well-connected relatives who, in most cases, end up being nothing more than overpaid, useless burdens...

It’s all just hostile propaganda meant to scare more Americans into leaving. As if there’s any country out there where the school system or healthcare is actually better organized... it’s all a lie. Besides, the President said we were on our way to becoming one of the most developed nations in America, so we must be there by now ☕

Back when I was at the Life clinic, I used to practice my Italian just to get used to how it sounds...😁

I can tell everyone's a little too shy to admit they were following Suleiman, even if a few of us ☕
...

Amanda Evans2 said:I wouldn't call it bottom-of-the-barrel; I’m still watching it even after four seasons.

To play back my old *House of Cards* argument, in my opinion, it’s incomparably better than *Homeland*.

The first couple of seasons were amazing, but once they started diving into those Russian spy plots, it felt a bit forced. The quality definitely took a dip for me...

Noah Roberts46 said:Taboo is total garbage, plain and simple. Personally, I think Game of Thrones is actually better this season than usual; it's evolved into this heavy but entertaining kind of trash, at least they aren't dragging things out forever like they used to. Narcos is great, Fargo is great, even if that last season felt a bit lackluster.

Yeah, I agree, Taboo is pretty terrible. They try to act like it's some cult classic, but it's really just a mess...

vivideagle7 said:Forget those cookie-cutter, recycled shows for a second and just dive into the new Twin Peaks. Honestly, television is finally starting to push past its own boundaries.

It really is excellent. I actually went back and rewatched the first two seasons just to make sure I caught everything. With this latest episode, the pace is picking up even more...👍

Robert Torres said:Judging by all the ups and downs in these threads and the constant back-and-forth references, there are a ton of ASOIAF fans hanging out here. It makes me wonder if anyone actually sat through those last few episodes of Game of Thrones? I've heard they're absolute fire, like... legendary level...

Personally, I checked out after season four. The way they were butchering the source material felt like a straight punch to the gut. So now I'm curious—is what we've seen lately actually that mind-blowing and unexpected that it could satisfy even the hardcore readers who can't stand the show? Is it worth spoiling the books if anyone even bothers reading them, or is it still just that same overhyped, boring train wreck that HBO’s flagship always seemed to be...

The images in your head are almost always better than what ends up on screen. That's true 99% of the time...

But within reason, they did a solid job. I do wonder if Martin will ever actually finish the series after this, especially since he took forever to get through each book before...

Also, most people probably don't know this, but long before the books blew up and way before the show started, Martin was a guest speaker at a convention in New York. I actually went and saw him speak live. He was a really cool guy. Back then, I was ordering his books from Amazon and was totally hooked... I think it was around the time the third one was being written...

We really ought to find out who he voted for in the last election...