killerrobot comments

Posted in: Pole dancing holds world championships See in context

haters- have you ever TRIED pole dancing? that's some physically challenging stuff right there!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Obama won't yield on tax hike for wealthiest See in context

40% of American's don't pay taxes!?!? FORTY PERCENT??? WHERE do you get this garbage???

Which is more morally right: taking a few thousand out of a millionaire's paycheck so that he can't afford to remodel the kitchen in his/her vacation home, or taking $20 out of a working class family's paycheck so that they can't afford to buy as many fresh fruits and vegetables?

Sounds like a lot of this pro-Bush-tax-cut sentiment stems from the disbelief that there are honest poor people in America. Hard to believe, but it's true. It's 2010 and many families still struggle to put food on the table. And NOT ALL of these are slugs who just want to scam the government for free money via welfare.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: U.S. judge: Military's ban on gays is unconstitutional See in context

^^^ There aren't many terribly friendly, accepting work environments for gays these days.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Zazen: There’s never been a better time to try a spot of meditation See in context

"Temples are full of foreign kids talking about this stuff and at the same time squabbling over who gets to light the candles etc. A total waste of good time and besides, it came from yoga which I now do and can see practical results in daily life without all the fancy quasi religious talk. "

Yes... it's quite sad. Everywhere you go, there are people who want to be acknowledged as important and will behave as such. As long as you know why you're there, it should be easy to ignore those who are only seeking material gratification or validation from others (especially those just going along with the latest fashion trends).

Your practice is what you make of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Posted in: Who cares about hemlines? Women's pants again on the radar See in context

Men, I have a question and I'd appreciate a dead-honest answer, as non-PC as it may be (this is the internet, after all).

You have to choose between two qualified women to be your new employee. This job doesn't require any PR whatsoever: this isn't sales, reception, or any similar job in which looking good may play a role. It's an office job. For sake of argument, both women are equally attractive in your mind, but one puts significantly more work into her appearance. She wears make-up, styles her hair, and wears all the latest fashions. The other does not wear make-up and looks undeniably professional in all respects, but without keeping up with all the latest fashions (and may not wear the sort of clothing that's best suited to her figure). While the former does not exceed the most basic job qualifications, the other has demonstrated through the course of the interview some extra skills and initiative that would really benefit your company (though not OVERqualified).

Who do you pick?

BTW, please excuse the cliche nature of this scenario.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites


©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.