Not so secret gov reports

Not so secret gov reports (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

KenDckey -> Not so secret gov reports (11/8/2015 2:06:09 PM)
http://www.politico.com/agenda/story/2015/10/the-publicly-funded-reports-you-cant-read-000293 If the CRS reports were made public, then the public would know how DC works. Well maybe anyway.

MrRodgers -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/8/2015 6:38:03 PM)
Why am I not surprised ? Seems in most cases, the govt. has something, way too much to hide.

KenDckey -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/9/2015 3:53:04 AM)
I agree. They are all into hiding from the people the working of government so that they can do whatever they want regardless of the will of the people in my opinion.

joether -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/9/2015 10:01:22 AM)
You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? Most Americans never read the ACA. How many of those have been 'told' what is in and not in the ACA? The grand majority of them. How easy has it been to manipulate a whole swath of Americans with misinformation about it over the past few years? Pathetically easy! Now try to image if ordinary Americans had access to it. How percentage of the adult population would actually read and understand the content? Like a few percentage points? How many things could be used by a private entity to push a political ideology onto an unsuspecting audience that thinks its a news organization with integrity and journalism? Yes, I'm talking about FOX 'news' and their 'Low Information Voter' audience.... How many Americans read and understood the Iran Treaty? It was only 159 pages long. In fact it was an easy read through. How many of you on this board took the time to read it and more importantly, understand it? None! That's because its way to complicated and complex. You need someone to condense all that information down to sound bytes of a complete words. An yet, demand to have access to information to which your bitching about? Why should someone like me take you seriously, when I've had to correct many of your ignorances on the ACA for the last six years? Why should the government, whom has even more experience with ignorant and uneducated Americans release information that will do no good for anyone involved? The government will have to waste....MORE....resources, educating a population to lazy to learn the basic information needed to begin learning more complex topics. For example....the Theory of Climate Change. A high level scientific subject that most Americans are completely clueless about. They do not possess the basic level knowledge of science (i.e. a high school knowledge of physics, chemistry and biology), to begin understanding the intermediate levels (and there are many levels), before understanding the scientific theory. In fact most Americans are not aware that a scientific theory is the highest level of knowledge in science. To them, a scientific theory is just a guess (which it is not). Neither of you are making a compelling argument as to why you need this information. If you really needed the information; it wouldn't be hard to access. You just go to your local library, talk to the nice librarian behind the counter, and find a nice place to settle down for a few hours of reading. It really is that simple of a process. But neither of you and the grand majority of Americans want that. You want to be told within a sentence or two the 'ghist' of information. The document in question could be as long as 'War & Peace' but you want just a sentence length of information. How much good knowledge is lost? Vast sums! You just want to sound like your informed. Because being informed requires work and effort. You want the hot sports car without paying for it from the auto dealer!

JVoV -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 1:33:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? Most Americans never read the ACA. How many of those have been 'told' what is in and not in the ACA? The grand majority of them. How easy has it been to manipulate a whole swath of Americans with misinformation about it over the past few years? Pathetically easy! Now try to image if ordinary Americans had access to it. How percentage of the adult population would actually read and understand the content? Like a few percentage points? How many things could be used by a private entity to push a political ideology onto an unsuspecting audience that thinks its a news organization with integrity and journalism? Yes, I'm talking about FOX 'news' and their 'Low Information Voter' audience.... How many Americans read and understood the Iran Treaty? It was only 159 pages long. In fact it was an easy read through. How many of you on this board took the time to read it and more importantly, understand it? None! That's because its way to complicated and complex. You need someone to condense all that information down to sound bytes of a complete words. An yet, demand to have access to information to which your bitching about? Why should someone like me take you seriously, when I've had to correct many of your ignorances on the ACA for the last six years? Why should the government, whom has even more experience with ignorant and uneducated Americans release information that will do no good for anyone involved? The government will have to waste....MORE....resources, educating a population to lazy to learn the basic information needed to begin learning more complex topics. For example....the Theory of Climate Change. A high level scientific subject that most Americans are completely clueless about. They do not possess the basic level knowledge of science (i.e. a high school knowledge of physics, chemistry and biology), to begin understanding the intermediate levels (and there are many levels), before understanding the scientific theory. In fact most Americans are not aware that a scientific theory is the highest level of knowledge in science. To them, a scientific theory is just a guess (which it is not). Neither of you are making a compelling argument as to why you need this information. If you really needed the information; it wouldn't be hard to access. You just go to your local library, talk to the nice librarian behind the counter, and find a nice place to settle down for a few hours of reading. It really is that simple of a process. But neither of you and the grand majority of Americans want that. You want to be told within a sentence or two the 'ghist' of information. The document in question could be as long as 'War & Peace' but you want just a sentence length of information. How much good knowledge is lost? Vast sums! You just want to sound like your informed. Because being informed requires work and effort. You want the hot sports car without paying for it from the auto dealer! tl;dr

Kirata -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 7:00:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV tl;dr That was a short one for him! K.

Aylee -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 7:14:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV tl;dr That was a short one for him! K. I am not sure what his point was. He claims people have not read what he thinks they should have read so they should not be allowed to read other things. Umm. . . What is this? Middle School? You did not read Huck Finn so you may not read Dune? And how does he know who has read what? I suppose G*d could have told him on that hotline he has.

thompsonx -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 8:55:23 AM)
You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? You are stating that most americans are too stupid to walk and chew gum....cite please.

joether -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 10:01:49 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV quote: ORIGINAL: joether You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? Most Americans never read the ACA. How many of those have been 'told' what is in and not in the ACA? The grand majority of them. How easy has it been to manipulate a whole swath of Americans with misinformation about it over the past few years? Pathetically easy! Now try to image if ordinary Americans had access to it. How percentage of the adult population would actually read and understand the content? Like a few percentage points? How many things could be used by a private entity to push a political ideology onto an unsuspecting audience that thinks its a news organization with integrity and journalism? Yes, I'm talking about FOX 'news' and their 'Low Information Voter' audience.... How many Americans read and understood the Iran Treaty? It was only 159 pages long. In fact it was an easy read through. How many of you on this board took the time to read it and more importantly, understand it? None! That's because its way to complicated and complex. You need someone to condense all that information down to sound bytes of a complete words. An yet, demand to have access to information to which your bitching about? Why should someone like me take you seriously, when I've had to correct many of your ignorances on the ACA for the last six years? Why should the government, whom has even more experience with ignorant and uneducated Americans release information that will do no good for anyone involved? The government will have to waste....MORE....resources, educating a population to lazy to learn the basic information needed to begin learning more complex topics. For example....the Theory of Climate Change. A high level scientific subject that most Americans are completely clueless about. They do not possess the basic level knowledge of science (i.e. a high school knowledge of physics, chemistry and biology), to begin understanding the intermediate levels (and there are many levels), before understanding the scientific theory. In fact most Americans are not aware that a scientific theory is the highest level of knowledge in science. To them, a scientific theory is just a guess (which it is not). Neither of you are making a compelling argument as to why you need this information. If you really needed the information; it wouldn't be hard to access. You just go to your local library, talk to the nice librarian behind the counter, and find a nice place to settle down for a few hours of reading. It really is that simple of a process. But neither of you and the grand majority of Americans want that. You want to be told within a sentence or two the 'ghist' of information. The document in question could be as long as 'War & Peace' but you want just a sentence length of information. How much good knowledge is lost? Vast sums! You just want to sound like your informed. Because being informed requires work and effort. You want the hot sports car without paying for it from the auto dealer! tl;dr They say 'Ignorance is Bliss' until you realize your smack in the middle of a minefield and can not retrace your steps....

joether -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 10:13:28 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV tl;dr That was a short one for him! K. I am not sure what his point was. He claims people have not read what he thinks they should have read so they should not be allowed to read other things. Umm. . . What is this? Middle School? You did not read Huck Finn so you may not read Dune? And how does he know who has read what? I suppose G*d could have told him on that hotline he has. If what you state is correct, why is it your against the Iran Treaty yet have never read it, nor could answer a single question about it when asked? The answer is simple: You didn't read the document. Reading the document, would mean your KNOWLEDGEABLE about its content. Which would mean one of two things when faced with some specific questions: 1 ) You can reflect from memory to an answer, OR, 2 ) Know within the document where to look for the answer. For people like you, your information comes from sources with a political agenda. In other words, your told what to think and how to say it. Is that really studying the facts and truth of the issue? No, its just being ignorant and making shit up for your own political ideology. Not one person has made a realistic argument to see such information. If such information was freely available, would you read it and understand its contents? No of course not! The Affordable Care Act is a matter of public record. How many people on this forum have read it from start to finish and understood everything in between? That's right....NONE. So why should the government release information that your not going to read or understand the context with which its in, in forming a good understanding of the document's content(s)? Frankly the information in the OP can be had if one really wants it. Generally its a dry read, without pictures, lots of data points, and a few sources that require reading before the document itself is read. Lots of good information, but it requires one to think for themselves rather than having someone spoon feed it to your brain. To use a metaphor, it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material?

joether -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 10:41:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? You are stating that most americans are too stupid to walk and chew gum....cite please. Citing an example implies specific information from a specific source. If I was quoting the following: "No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law." Do I need to state it comes from the 3rd amendment? Nor really, because its a well known bit of information. But this crowd I might have to on the grounds that most of you would fail a Bill of Rights exame. In fact Gallup found the majority of Americans could not list off two freedoms granted under the 1st amendment. How many do you think would know what the 3rd and 7th amendment gives? How many of you know what the 7th amendment contains? That one is... "The Judicial power of the United States shall not be construed to extend to any suit in law or equity, commenced or prosecuted against one of the United States by Citizens of another State, or by Citizens or Subjects of any Foreign State." Right? Now, if I was citing information that is not well known, THEN, I would have to quote a source of information. For example, if I was talk about Grandfathered Health Plans Under the ACA, I would quote it (like I just did in the link). I could go straight to the source, but the understanding of grandfathered plans is listen in like five different places. A real chore to put them all together, create a weblink to post the actual reading. The link works because its defining the information accurately without political bias. Now, to your original question. One only has to plug in the info into Google: "Walk and Chew Gum" to find there are quite a few sources of information. One of a study that was released back in May of this year on the cognitive functions of the human brain as it attempts to perform two actions at once. That those with certain mental disabilities have a harder time completing the tasks. If this had been a thread about those mental illnesses I might use the information and source it (like I usually do). To answer my quoted information; yes, Americans really are ignorant on many things. Might explain why our nation keep slipping behind other nations on Math, Science, and even general educational requirements. That it is even more a problem with those of a 'conservative' bent on politics then liberal thought. Has there been a direct correlation between 'knowledge' and 'political thought process' as it relates to the dominant political schools of thought in the USA (i.e. liberal moderate, conservative)? Yes. Would I quote them? Not really. Since the data is rather flimsy right now and requires more researching. On this board, I've observed many individuals not understanding information as it relates to political documents or dialogue. I cite many of the threads on here about the ACA. One member of the 'audience' asked a question on the ACA with regards to 'how much will it cost me if I dont get healthcare coverage this year'. To which I gave them the information straight from the ACA. Between my post and several others before it, mine contained factual information, with a link! If we required people to pass a 100 question exam on US History and Policy for the last two Presidential Elections to vote on the current; how many conservatives would fail it and thus not be allowed to vote? Most of them. In ending I have just one thing further to state: the quote on the 7th is not correct; it comes from the 11th. How many honestly checked to see if I was right or not?

bounty44 -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 12:02:42 PM)
any chance we can make "dr" also stand for "drivel?"

KenDckey -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 12:10:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether You both are implying that the majority of Americans are able to handle complex and complicated amounts of information and behave like reasonable, rational, and mature adults? Most Americans never read the ACA. How many of those have been 'told' what is in and not in the ACA? The grand majority of them. How easy has it been to manipulate a whole swath of Americans with misinformation about it over the past few years? Pathetically easy! Now try to image if ordinary Americans had access to it. How percentage of the adult population would actually read and understand the content? Like a few percentage points? How many things could be used by a private entity to push a political ideology onto an unsuspecting audience that thinks its a news organization with integrity and journalism? Yes, I'm talking about FOX 'news' and their 'Low Information Voter' audience.... How many Americans read and understood the Iran Treaty? It was only 159 pages long. In fact it was an easy read through. How many of you on this board took the time to read it and more importantly, understand it? None! That's because its way to complicated and complex. You need someone to condense all that information down to sound bytes of a complete words. An yet, demand to have access to information to which your bitching about? Why should someone like me take you seriously, when I've had to correct many of your ignorances on the ACA for the last six years? Why should the government, whom has even more experience with ignorant and uneducated Americans release information that will do no good for anyone involved? The government will have to waste....MORE....resources, educating a population to lazy to learn the basic information needed to begin learning more complex topics. For example....the Theory of Climate Change. A high level scientific subject that most Americans are completely clueless about. They do not possess the basic level knowledge of science (i.e. a high school knowledge of physics, chemistry and biology), to begin understanding the intermediate levels (and there are many levels), before understanding the scientific theory. In fact most Americans are not aware that a scientific theory is the highest level of knowledge in science. To them, a scientific theory is just a guess (which it is not). Neither of you are making a compelling argument as to why you need this information. If you really needed the information; it wouldn't be hard to access. You just go to your local library, talk to the nice librarian behind the counter, and find a nice place to settle down for a few hours of reading. It really is that simple of a process. But neither of you and the grand majority of Americans want that. You want to be told within a sentence or two the 'ghist' of information. The document in question could be as long as 'War & Peace' but you want just a sentence length of information. How much good knowledge is lost? Vast sums! You just want to sound like your informed. Because being informed requires work and effort. You want the hot sports car without paying for it from the auto dealer! 1. I believe most people are reasonable intelligent and mature. 2. And what I don't understand is your argument for a compelling need for the information. It should be readily available for those that choose to access it. It isn't classified. If it were then someone should be investigating how people get ahold of it that shouldn't.

thompsonx -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 12:19:07 PM)
You are stating that most americans are too stupid to walk and chew gum....cite please.

lovmuffin -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 4:43:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: joether it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material? It would depend on what planet you were on when you picked the tomato 🚀

Aylee -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 5:18:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin quote: ORIGINAL: joether it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material? It would depend on what planet you were on when you picked the tomato 🚀 Tomatoes are the one food I know of that are better for you canned than fresh. Once again the Twit shows his ignorance. http://www.eatingwell.com/blogs/healthy_cooking_blog/fresh_vs_canned_vs_frozen_which_is_better

lovmuffin -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/10/2015 6:05:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin quote: ORIGINAL: joether it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material? It would depend on what planet you were on when you picked the tomato 🚀 Tomatoes are the one food I know of that are better for you canned than fresh. Once again the Twit shows his ignorance. http://www.eatingwell.com/blogs/healthy_cooking_blog/fresh_vs_canned_vs_frozen_which_is_better That is why I tried adding tomato paste to my salsa recipe, to make it even more healthy. Unfortunately I think it tastes better without it.

thompsonx -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/12/2015 8:17:59 AM)
ORIGINAL: Aylee ORIGINAL: lovmuffin ORIGINAL: joether it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material? It would depend on what planet you were on when you picked the tomato 🚀 Tomatoes are the one food I know of that are better for you canned than fresh. Once again the Twit shows his ignorance. http://www.eatingwell.com/blogs/healthy_cooking_blog/fresh_vs_canned_vs_frozen_which_is_better From your cite: Fresh Tomatoes vs. Canned Tomatoes If you’ve ever eaten a tomato in b]February, then you are well aware of the challenges that a fresh tomato faces. It’s a seasonal food. But even in season, canned tomatoes offer something that fresh can’t. Tomatoes are preserved using heat, which releases lycopene—a carotenoid that may help prevent prostate and breast cancer. It appears that what they are saying is that tomatoes from vermont in febuary may not be as healthy as tomatoes from vermont grown in july. That the benifits of lycopene are not known but may be benificial. I live in southern california and I will sitck with the fresh ones I grow all year long.

thishereboi -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/13/2015 2:46:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: JVoV tl;dr That was a short one for him! K. I am not sure what his point was. He claims people have not read what he thinks they should have read so they should not be allowed to read other things. Umm. . . What is this? Middle School? You did not read Huck Finn so you may not read Dune? And how does he know who has read what? I suppose G*d could have told him on that hotline he has. Seems to me that he is going to an awful lot of trouble to show us how superior he is over everyone else. But as long as he keeps posting the same bullshit over and over again I don't see why what he read beforehand would matter. It obviously hasn't taught him anything.

Aylee -> RE: Not so secret gov reports (11/13/2015 9:25:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx ORIGINAL: Aylee ORIGINAL: lovmuffin ORIGINAL: joether it would be like eating a tomato. I would pick the tomato straight off the planet, wash it, and eat it. You would buy it from a can after its been processes and things are added to keep its color, taste, and shelf life active. Who is getting better material? It would depend on what planet you were on when you picked the tomato 🚀 Tomatoes are the one food I know of that are better for you canned than fresh. Once again the Twit shows his ignorance. http://www.eatingwell.com/blogs/healthy_cooking_blog/fresh_vs_canned_vs_frozen_which_is_better From your cite: Fresh Tomatoes vs. Canned Tomatoes If you’ve ever eaten a tomato in b]February, then you are well aware of the challenges that a fresh tomato faces. It’s a seasonal food. But even in season, canned tomatoes offer something that fresh can’t. Tomatoes are preserved using heat, which releases lycopene—a carotenoid that may help prevent prostate and breast cancer. It appears that what they are saying is that tomatoes from vermont in febuary may not be as healthy as tomatoes from vermont grown in july. That the benifits of lycopene are not known but may be benificial. I live in southern california and I will sitck with the fresh ones I grow all year long. There is a book called, "Eating on the Wild Side," by Jo Robinson. If you are interested in the different health benefits of food, you might enjoy it. Something that website did not mention about the fresh versus canned for tomatoes is that canned tomatoes are picked when ripe unlike the tomatoes you buy at the store. This also makes them healthier. If I recall correctly, the tomatoes that are canned are also less modified for looks and color and ship ability than store bought (or even some home grown) and that has kept more health properties. I am personally indifferent as to whether the posters here choose fresh or canned tomatoes. And there are some uses they are not interchangeable for.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375