Invasion of the loudmouths

esh dov ets

Well-Known Member
Fresh batch of cuban-style picadillo from scratch, to be served with black beans and rice, and sliced bananas.

My house smells like heaven currently...

View attachment 3909361
looks good to me, just a little extra liquid still.
i use 80\20 ground meat or leaner unless i'm doing meatballs or loaf. in which case i drain fat. picadillo can be soupy to taste or from both or tomato. i like to either roast the tomatoes or simmer about 3- 5 with 3 cups water a spoon of sugar , dash salt and a bay leaf maybe sage , sometimes chillies and or more. simmer high till frothy then reduce heat and reduce liquid.. can reduce to stewed, sauce or all the way to ketchup this way keep eye on water maybe add if cooking down more.
Also have a method i try to use infrequently where i will cook some things separately while other stuff rests in a bowl or plate or cup for liquids then i combine; this allows me to find optimal ratios and to use less burners and pots and pans. it also helps me create , if i fuck up i can just not use that portion. it also takes me much longer than a pro esp. when creating.

heres some ideas from the last year based on the peccadillo and chicharron meal posted earlier. i mix it up but heres ground meat and chicken schnitzel (fried chicken) 20160704_170652.jpg 20160712_215140.jpg 20160721_193235.jpg IMG_20160818_214301.jpg IMG_20160818_214700.jpg IMG_20160818_215406.jpg IMG_20160823_174848.jpg IMG_20160823_175610.jpg IMG_20160824_223158.jpg IMG_20161014_201240.jpg
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Doesn't anyone else here regularly watch Sargon of Akkad's work?

Could only get through the first two subjects. The first, Amy Schumer's apparently abysmally bad show on Netflix the guy did a good job of shredding the show. I don't know why he made a reference to the left somehow protecting her but whatever, he has an ax to grind.

The story about Muslim religious extremism creeping in through the principals office sent me to the web to fact check. It seems to be a true story. I don't know why he made a reference to the left somehow protecting the principal but whatever, he has an ax to grind.

about 9 minutes. The remaining 20 minutes was too much to comtemplate.
 

heckler73

Well-Known Member
Could only get through the first two subjects. The first, Amy Schumer's apparently abysmally bad show on Netflix the guy did a good job of shredding the show. I don't know why he made a reference to the left somehow protecting her but whatever, he has an ax to grind.

Eh? So that was your first time? That story should have been skipped. It was the rest of the vid that I found more worthy of consideration. Sargon tends to circle around topics of feminism and SJWs, but his focus has been extended with the circus that has blown-in with Trump. He's a well-read man (and father) who I regularly find to be insightful, yet leaving room for respectful disagreement.


If you had the curiosity to explore further, you would have come across an article--along with Sargon's sharp dismantling of it--that dared to suggest swapping babies randomly at birth would eliminate racism.

https://aeon.co/ideas/if-babies-were-randomly-allocated-to-families-would-racism-end

A Psych. Ph.D. wrote that article in complete seriousness ! But perhaps some on here would think it a good idea, too?
It is that kind of short-sighted do-goodery which he attacks with panache, that makes his work worth viewing every week, for me. I can see how his output is too long for you, knowing your preferences, though.
 

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
How some radio hosts set the agenda
Invasion of the loudmouths



Alex Jones has said the shooting at Sandy Hook, Conn., was staged.
Joe Walsh, a U.S. talk-radio host, last week tweeted to gun-control advocates whose children were killed in the horrific Newton, Conn., shooting in 2012: “I’ll just say it: Sandy Hook Parents: Your 15 minutes is up.”

Alex Jones, a U.S. talk-radio host, has said the shooting at Sandy Hook was staged. He says the moon landings were faked.

Mark Levin, a U.S. talk-radio host, this month alleged, without evidence, that the Obama administration used “police state” surveillance tactics against the Donald Trump presidential campaign. He has said “the Muslim Brotherhood has infiltrated our government.”

Michael Savage, a U.S. talk-radio host, once said of autism: “In 99 per cent of the cases, it’s a brat who hasn’t been told to cut the act out. That’s what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they’re silent? They don’t have a father around to tell them, ‘Don’t act like a moron. You’ll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don’t sit there crying and screaming, idiot.’”

Sean Hannity, a U.S. talk-radio and Fox News TV host, once claimed that Obama “went to a Muslim school” and “grew up in Kenya.”

These are the kinds of people from whom the president of the United States gets his information, and worse, rebroadcasts it. U.S. talk-radio hosts were hugely influential before Trump’s election, and they are even more so now.

Trump has called Jones “amazing.” He gets advice from Hannity. His infamous tweets alleging his predecessor ordered wiretaps against him were based on the report by Levin.

Despite Trump’s many attacks on the mainstream media, it is these people and their ilk, none of them journalists, who help give the media a bad name.

Even their less outrageous (and less famous) colleagues are fond of prescribing simple, poorly considered solutions to complex problems.

They have been multiplying since 1987, during the Reagan administration, when the U.S. Federal Communications Commission stopped enforcing the so-called Fairness Doctrine, which obliged broadcasters to devote air time to contrasting views on matters of public interest.

The abandonment of the doctrine did not likewise cause so-called “progressive” radio shows to multiply, perhaps because “progressives” are lousy at it. Maybe they don’t shout enough.

Few people want to listen to leftwing dullards when right-wing fabulists are available, apparently.

Perhaps also progressives are not interested in the fame and fortune such shows can generate for their hosts, although it’s hard to believe.

After all, the granddaddy of them all, Rush Limbaugh, earned $77 million in 2015, according to Forbes. Sean Hannity made $29 million. Glenn Beck made $16.5 million.

Sometimes, these people back off a bit. Savage said he was taken out of context on autism. Limbaugh has apologized on occasion, and Beck admits he has said “stupid things.”

But their apologies and clarifications rarely resonate with listeners, or the president for that matter. The misinformation these loudmouths spew somehow finds its way into some circles of conventional wisdom, where normal thinkers are obliged to actually refute it.

https://www.pressreader.com/canada/the-hamilton-spectator/20170318/281513635968684
Abandoning the Fairness Doctrine allowed the corporate owners of the channels these loudmouths inhabit to simply leave the progressive seat at the mic unfilled. It's not a lack of talent on the left, it's simple unchecked bias.
 

HAF2

Well-Known Member
Had to do some googling

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

I have no recollection of news or radio programs when this was still implemented.

But today everyone with a computer or the ability to record their voice for a satalite radio station can be one of these entertainment personalities. Seems like the fairness doctrine, if it still existed, would be almost impossible to implement across the board.
 

dagwood45431

Well-Known Member
Fresh (hairy) chicharron & cristalizado/marzipan pear:
(Imagine the sweetest, truest ripe pear flavor and multiply it by ten.)

View attachment 3909236

Caviar-like texture, bright sun in edible form:

View attachment 3909237
I

Got some fat prawns marinating in mojo for later. Bloated and ready for a nap....
Abandoning the Fairness Doctrine allowed the corporate owners of the channels these loudmouths inhabit to simply leave the progressive seat at the mic unfilled. It's not a lack of talent on the left, it's simple unchecked bias.
RWNJ radio sells because whipping bitter and frightened old white dudes into a paranoid frenzy and then giving them a perceived safe space is easy and profitable. There is no similar product that could be sold to the multi-cultural, multi-racial, multi-generational left. Truth and facts have a liberal bias. We don't need no stinking 24/7 spin room to feel good about ourselves.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
https://aeon.co/ideas/if-babies-were-randomly-allocated-to-families-would-racism-end

A Psych. Ph.D. wrote that article in complete seriousness ! But perhaps some on here would think it a good idea, too?
It is that kind of short-sighted do-goodery which he attacks with panache, that makes his work worth viewing every week, for me. I can see how his output is too long for you, knowing your preferences, though.
he calls it a thought experiment in the first paragraph.

go piss your pants at the thought of a muslim and post your latest dissertation that is too nutty even for climate deniers.
 

Unclebaldrick

Well-Known Member
So abandoning any requirements for fairness at all is an improvement?

I rather think not.
In light of the internet, I would think that it is the illusion of fairness is impossible. It invariably would come down to some sort of council that would be politically gut-shot to begin with. We must rely on the American people to distinguish fact from fiction. Or enough of them to preclude another Trump. It is our only defense. Tough love.
 

Fogdog

Well-Known Member
Eh? So that was your first time? That story should have been skipped. It was the rest of the vid that I found more worthy of consideration. Sargon tends to circle around topics of feminism and SJWs, but his focus has been extended with the circus that has blown-in with Trump. He's a well-read man (and father) who I regularly find to be insightful, yet leaving room for respectful disagreement.

If you had the curiosity to explore further, you would have come across an article--along with Sargon's sharp dismantling of it--that dared to suggest swapping babies randomly at birth would eliminate racism.

https://aeon.co/ideas/if-babies-were-randomly-allocated-to-families-would-racism-end

A Psych. Ph.D. wrote that article in complete seriousness ! But perhaps some on here would think it a good idea, too?
It is that kind of short-sighted do-goodery which he attacks with panache, that makes his work worth viewing every week, for me. I can see how his output is too long for you, knowing your preferences, though.
I don't listen to Australian right wing radio much but it's similar to the US. The idea of a monolithic left that always makes the wrong choice, like protecting a shitty comedian because (I still have no idea why). It's a complicated world which what's his name in your post simplifies by putting up a straw man leftist to knock down. What I heard was propaganda, not an interesting commentary.

That said, he was witty and I'd probably put him on the radio for entertainment during a long drive. He wasn't as bad as Limbaugh.
 
Last edited:

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Had to do some googling

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fairness_Doctrine

I have no recollection of news or radio programs when this was still implemented.

But today everyone with a computer or the ability to record their voice for a satalite radio station can be one of these entertainment personalities. Seems like the fairness doctrine, if it still existed, would be almost impossible to implement across the board.
If they use FCC airwaves, they'd be required to provide equal time for opposing views.

Doing away with this rule allowed those who own the radio and TV networks to impose their own viewpoint, undiluted.
 
Top