I'd LOVE to see it beat Moore's La...
Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about beating Michael Moore.
Society has NOT accepted nerds
on
American Nerd
·
· Score: 1
Unfortunately, the truth is that nerds have not been accepted by society. What society has done is "re-invent" the nerd to fit what it wants, another cliche. The characters portrayed as nerds fit into two catagories; the first is the social misfit who understands technology but cannot perform well in face-to-face communication. These are still considered typical comic relief that may have a moment of granduer but ultimately fall back into their social role, supporting the cool, hip, with-it characters. The second are the normal Hollywood product of youth and good looks who happen to be good in a techincal area, mathmatics, computers, anatomy, etc. These people are socially acceptable and also happen to be highly intelligent.
To say that nerd is now cool is to say that conformists are the new rebels. It just doesn't make sense.
We can only hope that their prosperity also brings them a feeling of superiority and entitlement as well as a strong desire to spend the weekend watching sports from their couches. That should slow down their ascendency a bit.
Who says the reporting was showing popular sentiment? Did Nazi propaganda reflect German sentiment per-WWII? Or did it inflame what those controlling it wanted it to show?
There, someone finally brought Nazis into the argument. This thread has covered all stereotypical views.:-D
I think one of the major differences are in the age of the voters. Obama appealed to younger voters. Those people have less invested in the current system and are more open to change as they have more to benefit and less to lose. If you are 18 or even in your 20s most likely you have not built up any considerable wealth. Those that are in their 40s and above have been working for a couple decades and possibly investing their money. Those people have a great deal to lose. They are also less likely to use the internet and cell phone technology. Hence they are considered unhip and out of touch. Obviously an important factor in being allowed to exist in this day and age. I'm feeling a bit of "Logan's Run" coming down the pike.
Well, in defense, within hours of his televised question to Sen. Obama the media did:
1) Express the fact that he did not have a plumber's license. Which is not required when working for a master plumber.
2) Report on his issues with child support and other personal issues.
3) Publish a cartoon (Doonesbury) which portrayed a plumber as being totally ignorant of his craft but sharing views on abortion. Obviously a not-so-veiled reference to Joe t. Plumber. Which is a pretty low action for someone who is not knowledgable about said plumber's abilities.
Jump on the bandwagon.
The government did respond. The Federal government contacted the State government and offered aid. The Governor Blanco(?), and Mayor (Nagin) rejected the help. They then found out that it was a bad idea. The thinking that Katrina was a mistake by Bush ('cause he hate's black people) or that they should have superceeded the State gov. and declared martial law is ridiculous. It would only have brought on comments of overbearing government trying to infringe on personal freedom.
As stated before, Dems blame other and accept none themselves. We can be 3 years into an Obama term and have massive terrorist strikes and it will still be W's fault. Always will be.
No one shoves this stuff down a person's throat. As anything, only when people consume something does someone continue to produce it. Don't blame the media outlets, blame the people who spend their precious time reading and worrying about Britney.
My peeve is that good media (relative I know) is squeezed out by the vacuous majority.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd LOVE to see it beat Moore's La... Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about beating Michael Moore.
Unfortunately, the truth is that nerds have not been accepted by society. What society has done is "re-invent" the nerd to fit what it wants, another cliche. The characters portrayed as nerds fit into two catagories; the first is the social misfit who understands technology but cannot perform well in face-to-face communication. These are still considered typical comic relief that may have a moment of granduer but ultimately fall back into their social role, supporting the cool, hip, with-it characters. The second are the normal Hollywood product of youth and good looks who happen to be good in a techincal area, mathmatics, computers, anatomy, etc. These people are socially acceptable and also happen to be highly intelligent. To say that nerd is now cool is to say that conformists are the new rebels. It just doesn't make sense.
We already know that George Bush did it. Because he hates 4,600 y.o. nuclear family people.
We can only hope that their prosperity also brings them a feeling of superiority and entitlement as well as a strong desire to spend the weekend watching sports from their couches. That should slow down their ascendency a bit.
Who says the reporting was showing popular sentiment? Did Nazi propaganda reflect German sentiment per-WWII? Or did it inflame what those controlling it wanted it to show? There, someone finally brought Nazis into the argument. This thread has covered all stereotypical views. :-D
I think one of the major differences are in the age of the voters. Obama appealed to younger voters. Those people have less invested in the current system and are more open to change as they have more to benefit and less to lose. If you are 18 or even in your 20s most likely you have not built up any considerable wealth. Those that are in their 40s and above have been working for a couple decades and possibly investing their money. Those people have a great deal to lose. They are also less likely to use the internet and cell phone technology. Hence they are considered unhip and out of touch. Obviously an important factor in being allowed to exist in this day and age. I'm feeling a bit of "Logan's Run" coming down the pike.
Well, in defense, within hours of his televised question to Sen. Obama the media did: 1) Express the fact that he did not have a plumber's license. Which is not required when working for a master plumber. 2) Report on his issues with child support and other personal issues. 3) Publish a cartoon (Doonesbury) which portrayed a plumber as being totally ignorant of his craft but sharing views on abortion. Obviously a not-so-veiled reference to Joe t. Plumber. Which is a pretty low action for someone who is not knowledgable about said plumber's abilities. Jump on the bandwagon.
The government did respond. The Federal government contacted the State government and offered aid. The Governor Blanco(?), and Mayor (Nagin) rejected the help. They then found out that it was a bad idea. The thinking that Katrina was a mistake by Bush ('cause he hate's black people) or that they should have superceeded the State gov. and declared martial law is ridiculous. It would only have brought on comments of overbearing government trying to infringe on personal freedom. As stated before, Dems blame other and accept none themselves. We can be 3 years into an Obama term and have massive terrorist strikes and it will still be W's fault. Always will be.
No one shoves this stuff down a person's throat. As anything, only when people consume something does someone continue to produce it. Don't blame the media outlets, blame the people who spend their precious time reading and worrying about Britney. My peeve is that good media (relative I know) is squeezed out by the vacuous majority.