or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by canucklehead

NYT used to provide NEWS, not speculate on rumours. Actually, it used to be that news was about actual facts. Now it's all about speculation so that maybe, just maybe, you can say how smart you were when you happened to be right. I want real news back.
 I guess that would explain why there's so much copying / stealing of existing ideas and technology in China. That's apparently what they're taught to do at their elite universities. Anyway, in the United States, it appears simply photographing another person's photograph and blowing it up really big constitutes original artwork worth hundreds of thousands of...
Unfortunately, this supports my original instincts:http://www.cultofmac.com/323926/worlds-most-spoiled-dog-scores-two-apple-watch-editions/
 LOL! I guess that's what happens when you have low expectations but are capable of great hyperbole.
For having a moral compass? Proud of it.
My criticisms are based on the contents of the article. I'm not speculating or hypothesizing other scenarios that may or may not be true. It's the same as getting angry at a person when you hear of his crimes. When you discover the crimes were not committed at all, then you are allowed to change your views on the situation. If the circumstances are not as described, then that changes everything, doesn't it? But yeah, I was admittedly too harsh in my comment that he is...
 If I had the kind of money to throw around, wasting it on jewelry for a dog that likely is less comfortable wearing it, then yeah, I would be doing a lot more to improve the community in which I live. I won't apologize for having a moral compass.
 It's one thing to live comfortably because you can afford it. It's another to guy two gold watches for a dog. You do see the difference, right?
Actually, when a person has the chance to do good for society and would rather waste the opportunity by spending a ridiculous amount of money on an animal that has no want or need for expensive jewelry, then I'd say he's justifiably the target of criticism.
Wealthy people such as this guy might have monetary riches but certainly little moral, empathetic, or intellectual wealth.   While I would agree he can do whatever he wants with his money, when comparing what his dog needs versus what the poor people in his city needs, he would rather spend $28K on a dog that has zero desire or need for a watch - let alone two expensive ones - than to help people in need of food or shelter.   Funny on the surface but what a disgusting...
New Posts  All Forums: