Skip to main content

Chris Morrow

Chris Morrow's Public Library

  • In a world where the Republican nominee weren’t a dangerous lunatic, this would be much bigger news.

     

  • OK here is my problem with this. How is someone donating to a foundation and getting access to a SoS any different then getting access to a politician though a campaign donation? I mean people in this site have breathlessly defended the notion that money = speech precisely on the idea that access to politicians isn’t flat out corruption . If the “optics” are bad for Clinton’s why is it that the “optics” aren’t bad for politicians receiving campaign money from doners who are aligned with corporate business interests pushing agendas that serve those interests.

     

    I mean for crying out loud int blaten influence peddling and no one gives a damn. But oh boy … the Clintons have a charitable foundation with all of their finances online and transparent, follow all the laws regarding reporting and all of a sudden people act like it’s their personal piggy bank..

     

  • Look, if someone donates to a charity you run, will they have more success in getting their issues in front of you? Sure. Same if you used to work together at a different company. Or they were in your fraternity/sorority. Or your kids play soccer together. Or you both had the same mentor in another government agency. Or you are a Senator and someone from your hometown requests a meeting. This is reality. Is it “fair”? No. But it’s an unfairness that is based on intrinsic reality, it’s not something that can be avoided. If you know someone they will be able to get your ear. But this isn’t corruption. Corruption depends on what actions you take afterward. If the Bangladeshi banker requested a meeting with the Bangladesh mission head and got it, great. But if that banker asked Clinton to make a call to the CIA and… (I can’t think of anything. Something nefarious), then that would be corruption. But the idea that simply listening to people she knows is in itself corrupt is stupid and juvenile.

1 more annotation...

  • Solely from fish? I guess if I ever thought about it, I would have imagined this is the sort of thing we might see if this comic strip ever attempted witty wordplay.” –Mustang

     

  • “Biology fact: Pregnant pugs don’t get larger, they just grow extra ripples which eventually distend, detach, and grow into new pugs. This is a biological process known as ‘pugging.'” –Dan

     

  • A thief thinks every man steals. But even honest men know some men steal. I think the issues you're having is with the process itself. Who is promising not to ghost? Compare dates? Fake interest? These are like corner stones of dating. Especially the last two.

      

    Yes, dating is a massive competition and sometimes it's pretty depressing. Other times it's awesome. It's definitely not for the meek. You're going to have to take risks, get hurt, and take risks again. But if you stop focusing on the end goal and treating people as your future, and start approaching dating as meeting people you might even come to enjoy it.

  • But I think the bigger issue is:

      
     

    I only do these activities to seem fun and interesting while knowing inside that I don't really enjoy them

     
      

    If you're not having fun doing any of this it's gonna show. And then you either look weird or desperate.

  • This is so sad. Hobbies aren't supposed to feel like looming responsibilities preventing you from what you actually want in life. You're trying to create a person and I guess that is good but is the person you're creating someone you would find attractive or are you just hoping others will? Everything you've changed is external stuff. Any idea who you are and who you want to attract?

  • You both sound awful.

      

    May you have hundreds of tall, awful children together. Amen.

  • Man I would love to date a girl taller than me.

      

    Or someone under 5' again.

      

    Average height ladies are boring.

  • It became a lot creepier when they automatically created a page that chronicles your relationship. Every photo you're tagged in together, every link you shared on each other's walls, everything.

      

    I was "Facebook official" with my last gf for about 2 days until I noticed that shit.

  • You sound like your attractiveness far exceeds your bedroom skills. Most guys without skills can't even get a woman to have sex with them. You... you seem to be swimming in it...

      

  • I really identify with this OP. I'm terrified of actually getting to have sex with a girl because I'm fairly inexperienced and I have a lot of anxieties regarding touch/intimacy. I would really like to have a FWB type of situation with a girl who is patient and kind and willing to work with me while I figure out what I'm doing and what I like and how to connect physically with another person.

      

    But I feel like that sounds kind of shitty when I say that. I don't want whoever this hypothetical woman is to feel like I'm using her as a training dummy before moving on to a "real" partner.

  • I just want to have fun but my stupid brain is making it into a bigger thing than it is.

4 more annotations...

  • I agree that confidence is part of a feedback loop with success, but I don't agree if you think disruption or revolution within that process is impossible.

      

  • "No, you're a fucking babe, and I want you to know I'm super into this, but I'm also not ready to go there with you yet,"

     
      

    I've said this nearly verbatim a couple of times and it's been appreciated. I'm a really big fan of building up sexual tension, first, then finally banging it all out. God damn is that a great feeling.

  • But, you know, I think graduating into a recession is not fun, but it's a time to learn about what you do and the wind isn't at your back. And right now the wind is not at 20-somethings' backs and yes, you may have to have different part-time gigs to pay your bills and that's the way it was for me when I graduated, which was not long after the '87 crash.
  • JAY: They hear 30 is the new 20.

     

    MARTIN: Thirty is the new 20, which essentially is saying you've got 10 years to mess around. Did you feel that way, that you had 10 years to mess around?

  • In the sense that if I were to make one broad statement about the Millennials, it has to do with how much failure their parents tolerated. By that I mean, that failure is often a really incredible opportunity if kids are allowed to have it.

     

    And I would say, both from the family perspective and my practice perspective, the tolerance for kids failing is very low, and the requirement for kids to do something unusual - very high. So where my parents were really happy for me to have an advantage they didn't have, being a doctor was a great thing, not so much. Our kids feel, and grandkids certainly, that they have to do something very unusual.

     

    MARTIN: Well, Scott Rocco (ph) for example, tweets, weren't the same things said about Gen X, that are being said about Millennials now? Yes, no?

     

    CANTOR: I actually don't think so. And I think this issue of calibration of failure is a huge part of that.

  • I guess many guys like the idea that they can tell their girlfriend anything, especially something as intimate as the fact that they're a virgin.   
     
     
     That's true. But that kind of relationship isn't dependent on actually telling the girl intimate things, it's dependent on feeling able to tell her intimate things. If the guy thinks she will see him differently because he's a virgin, then he won't feel like he can tell her everything, whether or not he does decide tell her. So if he feels like it would hurt his chances, he would be better to wait, in my opinion.

  • I wish we could have had the friendship that is seen in every coming-of-age movie. The one where you attended all of my family events and I could walk right into your house without even a subtle hint of an invitation. I wish we could have posted the greatest #tbt pictures on Instagram because our moms had gotten candids of us blowing out each other’s candles on our birthday cakes when we were 6. I wish you could have come over with my favorite candy and a feel-good movie when a boy broke my heart. I wish I could have helped you with your hair and makeup before our Senior Prom. I wish a lot of things, but I mostly wish that we had met.

  • <form class="usertext warn-on-unload" id="form-t1_csnz6t3vmz" onsubmit="return post_form(this, 'editusertext')" action="#">

    I'm going to guess you live in a small city or out in the middle of nowhere. That's usually where you find the "uh-oh, I'm turning 20, better hurry up and get old" trope. Try visiting a big world class city and you'll see people in their 50's dressing like teenagers or 30-somethings hanging w/ the college kids.

     
     
    </form>
    • I'm 30, and I got out of a marriage when I was 28, I practically missed all my 20's being with this girl and pretending to do adult things.
    • I never really had a wild or crazy youth, and never really did a lot of the "do it while you're young!" things.

    • I thought of as "the friend zone" that was more pertinent than the term is usually applied.

        

      When two people meet for the first time, there's a window of time when romance can blossom, before things become too friendly. It's sort of inversely proportional to the amount of time you've known each other. There are exceptions, but as a relationship becomes more "friendly" there is less and less possibility of romance developing.

        

      The more typical "friend zone" definition is "I like a girl, and she doesn't like me," not, as I prefer, we've become friends. But there definitely "friend zone" people who have FWBs or similar relationships with their friends.

    • "Collectively, new Prius owners may now feel like Nineties alt-rock bands," he mused. "We had our day, but there's definitely cooler stuff out there now. It's Pearl Jam Syndrome."

       

      Wait, cooler than a Prius? Whatever could he mean?

       

      HINT: It comes with a plug.

    • More generally, the labelling tendency of the moralistic left to talk of racist people rather than racist acts results in a disastrous Corbynist search for purity. You can only be in the party if you’ve never done something that can be interpreted as racist, sexist or homophobic by a hostile inquisition that’s prepared to quote you out of context. Everyone must be without sin so they can throw the first stone.

       

      Oh, and there’s no redemption possible either.

       

    • Do you believe there is such a thing as a “criminal type”, who is necessarily and intrinsically criminal? Most people of the left would say no – crime is a product of the environment, the focus of criminal justice should be on rehabilitation, felons should be allowed to vote and be re-employed when they leave prison, and so on.

       

      Whereas the court of public opinion on “racism”, when limited to speech acts, recognises no statute of limitations and has no concept of a spent conviction. Once someone’s ever said something racist they are forever unsuitable for public life, amirite?

    • The idea that you can reject solidarity with a majority of your country people because they’re racists in favor of a moralistic “solidarity” with the peoples of the world seems to me like a particularly academic / professional deformation of morality as naturally being how academics and professionals think about their interests.

       

      Solidarity is usually not one way — usually that is called something like patronage or clientelism. What kind of reciprocal or universal solidarity is being imagined here that operates in any real way and that requires anything in return from its objects?

    8 more annotations...

    • Most people fall for it. Some, like Donald Trump, fall for it so hard  that he doesn't even realize that the dog whistle is an essential part  of the game. Polls tell him that most people support "states rights" or  "tough drug enforcement." He doesn't even realize that most people  don't realize that these are dog whistles. So he assumes that most  people support the views of White Evangelical Christian Republicans, and  figures, "why not just tell it straight?" And he tells it straight.
       
         He is ripping the mask off of the party, and everyone is horrified.  Especially the candidates who are left suddenly standing naked-faced in  the spotlight. They still have to walk that narrow line of appeasing  the hard-right bigots without offending the moderate majority, but Trump  has just whipped out a saw and is cheerfully severing their high-wire.   They need a back-up plan, stat, and find themselves frantically  denouncing Trump and his plainly-spoken bigotry, even while they  secretly agree with him.

    • 1) The idea that this sort of announcement would lead to a collective realization that Trump just exposed anything is far-fetched. The fact that Trump is trailing in the polls means his supporters would dismiss it as him merely giving himself an out — just as Oliver suggested it would be.

      politics

      the-fix

      Orlando Shooting Updates

      News and analysis on the deadliest mass shooting in U.S. history.

      post_newsletter348

      follow-orlando

      true

      false

    • This is a long-standing problem with Trump and media criticism. The conceit of commentaries like Oliver's is basically: "Look at how successful this guy has been while saying crazy and bigoted things." But if that is your belief — and you also believe Trump has made himself almost unelectable — then you could actually make a compelling case that that same system is working.

    1 - 20 of 22054 Next › Last »
    20 items/page

    Highlighter, Sticky notes, Tagging, Groups and Network: integrated suite dramatically boosting research productivity. Learn more »

    Join Diigo