- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Ag Zwin
| Favorite team: | Texas A&M  |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 25578 |
| Registered on: | 3/25/2016 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Mike Rowe bringing more heat than usual for him
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/16/26 at 5:05 pm
ETA: Switched link to X
For those who don’t know (and you should), Mike Rowe is the Dirty Jobs guy (and Dangerous Catch narrator) that has turned into a big advocate for skilled trades and pushing back on the “college as a necessity” mindset.
I’m not sure I’d call him conservative, in that I have seen him advocate for some old school liberalism concepts. More libertarian, probably.
In any case, he has shied away from weighing in on the lunacy of the left in a direct way. You could always sense it, but he pulls his punches.
Not with this post. Could have been even more scorched earth, but this was pretty robust.
Getting some pushback in the comments about stepping over the line, but he’s pushing right back.
People are sick and tired of this crap.
For those who don’t know (and you should), Mike Rowe is the Dirty Jobs guy (and Dangerous Catch narrator) that has turned into a big advocate for skilled trades and pushing back on the “college as a necessity” mindset.
I’m not sure I’d call him conservative, in that I have seen him advocate for some old school liberalism concepts. More libertarian, probably.
In any case, he has shied away from weighing in on the lunacy of the left in a direct way. You could always sense it, but he pulls his punches.
Not with this post. Could have been even more scorched earth, but this was pretty robust.
Getting some pushback in the comments about stepping over the line, but he’s pushing right back.
People are sick and tired of this crap.
Loading Twitter/X Embed...
If tweet fails to load, click here. quote:
Pardon my protracted absence. The New Year got off to a very hectic start, and I've been slammed. Not as slammed, perhaps, as Dr. Verma here, under the gentle inquiry of Senator Hawley, who had the audacity to ask the good doctor a real brain teaser earlier today - "Can men get pregnant?"
That was the question. A simple ‘yes or no’ query that Dr. Verma refused to answer. It’s remarkable to watch, not because of her rhetorical position, but because of her position in the medical community. Dr. Verma is an OBGYN - a licensed medical doctor whose expertise is rooted in human reproduction and human biology. By her own admission, she’s “a person of science,” who refuses to say that men can't get pregnant.
It was hard to watch this unfold and not be reminded of another Senate hearing in 2022, when Judge Ketanji Brown told Senator Blackburn, under oath, that she could not define the word “woman,” because she “wasn’t a biologist.” I remember thinking at the time that the Senate couldn’t possibly confirm a nominee who couldn’t define a woman. It would be an affront to common sense. Besides, since when do you have to be a biologist to answer such a basic question?
But of course, they did. The Senate confirmed Justice Brown, and millions of people despaired, even as millions of others celebrated. And now, four years later, we’re still at it. Some are celebrating Dr. Verma’s refusal to answer the Senator's question. But most people, I’ll wager, are wondering if the State Medical Boards in Georgia, Maryland, Massachusetts, and wherever else Dr. Verma is licensed to practice medicine, will let her continue to do so? Because, unlike the Justice Brown, Dr. Verma IS a biologist! She appeared in that capacity as an EXPERT! What excuse could she possibly have for failing to answer a question that's rooted in...biology?
Honest question - can a doctor have their medical license suspended for saying something incredibly stupid? I have no idea, so I asked ChatGPT that very question, and the AI told me this. “A medical license can be suspended or revoked if a physician's speech is considered unprofessional conduct, gross negligence, a direct risk to public safety, or constitutes the spread of misinformation in a professional capacity.” If the inability to answer the question, “Can men get pregnant,” doesn’t qualify, what does?
A lot of people are very quick these days to criticize anyone who doesn’t defer to the experts. But what are we to say to people who don’t trust the medical authorities on vaccines, or doubt the data behind climate catastrophism, when a licensed OBGYN can’t confirm or deny under oath that men can’t have babies? If a professor of geology with a PhD at a major university told his students the world was flat, should there be a consequence? If a licensed mechanic tells his customer there's no need to change the oil, should there be a consequence? If a lawyer tells his client to lie under oath, should there be a consequence? If there is no consequence to a licensed OBGYN refusing to clarify basic biology before the US Senate, on national TV, under oath, then how can the scientific/medical community ever expect to win back our trust?
PS. Because everything old is new again...
7
We left them behind a while ago.
Why does a lawyer need to be a mother-in-law to handle this?
Oh, wait…
Oh, wait…
re: Check out the Starlink speeds on SAS. All airlines will be installing soon.
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 3:04 pm to John somers
quote:
They won't ever replace ALL OF THEM at once.
Show me where I said they would.
I said that all the ones up there now would be obsolete at some point.
That’s not the same thing.
re: Anyone looking for an Amtrak deal, here it is.
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 3:01 pm to LSURussian
quote:
How is the political?
Here. I’ll make it political.
Amtrak is not a horrible service, but it’s still a solid example of how government programs (and the amount they are subsidized qualifies them) are so freaking bad at customer service.
Their map and this pass works fine if you are in the northeast and can see the points you want with shorter day trips. The pass ONLY covers coach seating.
If you want to take a longer trip, you are still only going to be in a coach seat. The pass doesn’t cover sleepers. Fair enough.
However, if you are doing this, and want to upgrade to a sleeper, the only option is to buy a completely separate ticket. There is no way to just buy an upgrade for a reasonable up charge. Doesn’t exist in any way.
I get that a deal like this should not cover such a clearly higher cost option. To not even give you a single option for paying an incremental charge, though, is asinine. It’s bad for both the customer and the company. Even airlines do this for every segment on an itinerary.
Pretty much anything where government “customer service” is involved is an exercise in doing the absolute least amount possible.
quote:
Why are you so worried about this?
You fricking spam and troll every thread like you're smart. You obviously got banned for this before.
I don’t know who either of you are. Unlike some on this board, I don’t stalk.
That being said, you made a claim in the thread OP, another poster asked you for specifics, and now you are asking why this is so important to him?
You sound like an idiot with this.
re: Check out the Starlink speeds on SAS. All airlines will be installing soon.
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 12:41 pm to AncientTiger
Of all Elon’s ventures, Starlink could end up being the biggest game changer. High speed no matter how remote.
Helps to own a space launch company, too.
That being said, there will come a time when all the satellites he’s put up there are obsolete. Wonder if there is a way to just have them self-destruct by dropping back into the atmosphere.
Now I have a new rabbit hole to go down.
Helps to own a space launch company, too.
That being said, there will come a time when all the satellites he’s put up there are obsolete. Wonder if there is a way to just have them self-destruct by dropping back into the atmosphere.
Now I have a new rabbit hole to go down.
re: Plane used to attack Venezuelan boats allegedly in civilian livery?
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 11:51 am to Megasaurus
quote:
didnt happen. Our drone fleet is massive.
Then why is the admin not saying this?
And what the hell does the size of a drone fleet have to do with the point?
And, as expected, the responses are already arguing a point I was not making.
I don't give a rip if the boats are marked as Mercy Ships. Not arguing the ethics, morals, or ANYTHING in this direction.
The question, and I will type this very slowly for you, is what advantage would there be in looking like a civilian airplane?
I don't give a rip if the boats are marked as Mercy Ships. Not arguing the ethics, morals, or ANYTHING in this direction.
The question, and I will type this very slowly for you, is what advantage would there be in looking like a civilian airplane?
re: ICE Agent reportedly suffered internal bleeding from being hit by SUV
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 11:41 am to BuckeyeGoon
quote:
The woman floored an suv from like a foot in front of him, its not crazy to think he may have been injured.
And, exactly how much force do you think a mid-range SUV is going to generate with one foot of acceleration from a standing stop?
Plane used to attack Venezuelan boats allegedly in civilian livery?
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/14/26 at 11:36 am
As much as I distrust the NYT and their reporting, the admin does not seem to be refuting the idea that one of the planes used to attack Venezuelan drug boats was painted/marked as a civilian aircraft.
Leaving aside the debate about how doing this would endanger legitimately civilian aircraft, my question is why would you do that in the first place?
Does anybody actually think that these boats would react differently, or be less vulnerable, if the planes were easily identifiable as US military?
They're boats, being attacked by airplanes. They are going to be blown to Hell either way.
What am I missing?
Leaving aside the debate about how doing this would endanger legitimately civilian aircraft, my question is why would you do that in the first place?
Does anybody actually think that these boats would react differently, or be less vulnerable, if the planes were easily identifiable as US military?
They're boats, being attacked by airplanes. They are going to be blown to Hell either way.
What am I missing?
quote:
This can’t be just a recent thing and I wonder if as far back as Reagan running the table in votes except for Minnesota if Minnesota as a original member in democrat frickery
Gee. If only there was another factor to consider in Reagan not winning Minnesota that year.
:rolleyes:
re: Trump to ensure that Americans don’t pick up the tab for data centers power consumption
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/13/26 at 9:40 am to BTROleMisser
quote:
That's basically what he said, bro. Stop it.
No, it’s not.
He said it is an issue, but the left has to stop making it the only issue.
CNN
FFS, can you people not deal in anything but absolutes?
quote:
“Climate change, disease, and poverty are all major problems,” Gates wrote. “We should deal with them in proportion to the suffering they cause.”
The Trump administration’s funding cuts, Gates argues, necessitate an immediate and larger focus on investment and resources to support those abandoned efforts.
“Although climate change will have serious consequences – particularly for people in the poorest countries – it will not lead to humanity’s demise,” Gates wrote. “This is a chance to refocus on the metric that should count even more than emissions and temperature change: improving lives. Our chief goal should be to prevent suffering, particularly for those in the toughest conditions who live in the world’s poorest countries.”
This will never not be sadly funny.
The full transcript of his radio address.
Billy Jeff sure talked a good game. Would be anathema to his party today.
Billy Jeff sure talked a good game. Would be anathema to his party today.
quote:
Good morning. This morning I want to talk with you about the problem of illegal immigration. It's a problem our administration inherited, and it's a very serious one. It costs the taxpayers of the United States a lot of money, and it's unfair to Americans who are working every day to pay their own bills. It's also unfair to a lot of people who have waited in line for years and years in other countries to be legal immigrants.
Our Nation was built by immigrants. People from every region of the world have made lasting and important contributions to our society. We support legal immigration. In fact, we're doing what we can to speed up the process for people who do apply for citizenship when they're here legally. But we won't tolerate immigration by people whose first act is to break the law as they enter our country. We must continue to do everything we can to strengthen our borders, enforce our laws, and remove illegal aliens from our country.
As I said in my State of the Union Address, we are a nation of immigrants, but we're also a nation of laws. And it is wrong and ultimately self-defeating for a nation of immigrants to permit the kind of abuse of our immigration laws we have seen in recent years.
This week, I sent strong legislation to Congress to try to stop those abuses, to secure our borders in the future, and to speed up deportation of illegal immigrants.
Our immigration policy is focused in four areas: first, strengthening border control; second, protecting American jobs by enforcing laws against illegal immigrants at the workplace; third, deporting criminal and deportable aliens; fourth, giving assistance to States who need it and denying illegal aliens benefits for public services or welfare.
Let me talk a little bit about two or three of these issues. First of all, on strengthening border control: For 2 years, we've been working very, very hard to strengthen our borders. We've put the best American technology to work at our borders. We've added a lot of Border Patrol agents, 350 last year, 700 this year. We're going to add at least another 700 next year.
In El Paso, our border guards stand so close together they can actually see each other. They maintain a sealed border in what used to be the biggest route into America for illegal aliens. We're extending this coverage to other sectors of the borders. We'll increase border control by 51 percent this year over 1993 and by 60 percent along the southwest border. That's pretty good for just 3 years.
We're also helping States to remove illegal aliens who are criminals, and I want to talk more about that in a moment. But focus on this: Right now we're deporting 110 illegal aliens everyday. That's almost 40,000 a year. And we're going to do even better.
Now, let me talk a little bit about increasing deportations. Our plan will triple the number of criminal and other deportable aliens deported since 1993. We want to focus on the criminal population or on those who are charged with crimes but who are here illegally. Every day, illegal aliens show up in court who are charged. Some are guilty, and surely, some are innocent. Some go to jail, and some don't. But they're all illegal aliens, and whether they're innocent or guilty of the crime they're charged with in court, they're still here illegally and they should be sent out of the country.
If they're sentenced to jail, they should go to jail. But then after their term is over, they should be removed from the United States. And when there is a plea bargain, I want deportation to be part of the deal. We've been doing this now in southern California, and just in southern California, under this provision, we're going to send out 800 to 1,000 illegal immigrants this year. It simply doesn't make any sense for us to have illegal aliens in our custody, in our courts, and then let them go back to living here illegally. That's wrong, and we should stop it.
Now, in addition to strengthening the Border Patrol, deporting more aliens who are part of our court system, and really cracking down on inspection at the work site in America, we have to face the fact that we've got another big problem, and that is the backlog. There is actually a backlog in the deportation of illegal aliens of over 100,000. That's 100,000 people we have identified who are still awaiting the completion of their deportation hearings. I have instructed the Justice Department to get rid of this backlog. If it takes extra judges, we'll ask Congress for the money to get them. We cannot justify continuing to have this large number of illegal aliens in our country simply because our court system won't process them.
We also have hundreds of thousands of people who have been ordered to leave our country, who then disappear back into the population. I have instructed the Justice Department, and particularly the Immigration and Naturalization Service, to come up with a plan in which we can cooperate with the States to identify these people and move them out as well.
Our country was built by immigrants, but it was built also by people who obeyed the law. We must be able to control our borders; we must uphold respect for our laws. We're cracking down on this huge problem we found when I got here, and we're going to keep working at it until we do much, much better.
Thanks for listening.
re: They came here illegally. That's a crime. They have to go.
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/13/26 at 8:54 am to Tunasntigers92
quote:
It's the Somalians, the skinnys
Honestly, these people make the traditional illegal immigrant look like model “citizens”.
If even a fraction of the fraud is true, this should be a massive issue.
quote:
Bill Gates tells us that Climate Change is no longer a threat.
Well, that’s not what he actually said, so there’s that.
I swear, I can’t tell anymore who here really can’t understand nuance and which are just trolling.
They came here illegally. That's a crime. They have to go.
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/13/26 at 12:25 am
re: Scott Adams has reportedly been moved to hospice care & given days to live
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/12/26 at 11:36 pm to hawgfaninc
The “Love Trumps Hate” crowd can’t wait to celebrate his death, and will only regret that it was not more prolonged and painful.
re: US workers are taking home less of what they produce than ever before
Posted by Ag Zwin on 1/12/26 at 11:16 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
My title is a direct quote from the tweet, the point of which is that workers are paid a smaller portion of the overall economic output.
If you accept the premise that people produce the output (and that is open for debate), then it’s a valid claim.
If you accept the premise that people produce the output (and that is open for debate), then it’s a valid claim.
Popular
8
