Jason DePolo

Largo, FL, United States

Someone is shy

Jason hasn't completed a profile. Should we look for some other people?

Comments & conversations

Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
Rory Stewart: Time to end the war in Afghanistan
"Can we decide to just completely pull out now, removing all troops from Afghanistan?" -Yes "What would that do to the country?" -In all probability it would reduce the amount of Afghani deaths and injustices to it's people. "Moreover, what kind of precedent would that set?" -There are no doubt some people who mean us harm that would interpret it as you do. However, there are some people left in the world who do not mean us harm, or are not sure yet. To those it might set the precedent that we are a nation capable of admitting we were wrong about something, for once, and apologizing for it, thereby reducing the amount of people in the world who want to kill us. I would agree that terrorism as a means to change is not acceptable, but ask yourself this. Which action causes more terror: (a) blowing up one building and killing 3,000 people, or (b) dropping thousands of bombs that destroy hundreds of buildings and take tens if not hundreds of thousands of lives over the course of ten years?
Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
Rory Stewart: Time to end the war in Afghanistan
Off-topic, but this is why we need term limits, an end to lifetime pensions and benefits, and limited public funding for elections. Throw in only a 3% raise a year for the congress instead of letting them vote for their own raises.
Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives
Mr. Buckner, with respect, I must ask why the mere mention of the Dalali Lama caused you to step right back into your republican box after you were able to step out of it for almost the entire talk. The man is respected, if nothing else, for the fact that he is able to view an entity that he feels is ruthlessly oppressing his people without hate. Whether or not anyone else in the world views his people as being oppressed is irrelevant. Also, the Dalai Lama may not have any moral authority to you, but many people agree that he does, and that fact does give him some amount of moral authority, if not over everyone. I also suspect the average Tibetan, along with many others, do not think George W. Bush or Pat Robertson have much moral authority either, yet I have to opine that they do, whether or not I agree with them. Your thoughts?
Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
What is the importance of building transparency in news media, and what would like to see? Any risks?
Oh, I couldn't agree more. And I think it goes even deeper than just advertisers. GE, a defense contractor, OWNS 49% of NBC. How can they be expected to objectively cover the subject of war? Financial companies are another issue. The networks spend half their day talking about their performance, and a quarter of their day advertising for them. How can they possibly be expected to ferret out their shadier dealings, or to share them with the public even if they did. How much of the current financial crisis could have been mitigated if news outlets were truly free to sick their investigative dogs on banks? We could make a similar case with insurance companies and how media can be used to affect public opinion about health care policy. The problem is that mass media has a vested interest in protecting the interests of all the entities that we depend on them to police, so to speak. The only people they do police, it appears to me, are entertainers, and those folks thrive on having their dysfunctional antics plastered all over the place. I would love to see more transparency as well, and if Santa is listening, I would also like a Red Rider BB gun for Christmas.:)
Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
Richard Dawkins: Militant atheism
I would agree with you that "'Militant' anything is by definition based on hierarchy and deference to authority, and NOT thinking for oneself." However I would have to disagree with the notion that science and religion are not corrosive to on another. It took many years for early scientists to convince religious scholars to come to terms with the fact that the earth is not flat, and that the universe did not revolve around it, for example. In evolutionary biology, we have just come across another set of observable, undeniable truths that religion obstinately tries to refute. The fact that many of them try to do it rationally with the bible is quite frustrating to me. Likewise, scientists have a hard time accepting the notion that not everything in the universe can be expressed exactly in a mathematical equation, in the same vein that we'll never be able to express the area or circumference of a circle exactly, given its radius, due to the fact that pi is an irrational number. We can always get a little closer by doing a little more calculation, but we'll never quite get there. That does not mean that there are not practical applications for the approximation of the area of a circle, or the approximation of physical laws as an equation. What is needed, I believe, is an acceptance by our species that all things in this wonderful universe will never be expressed by either a literal interpretation of a thousands of years old, heavily edited history of humanity or a mathematical equation. We need to wake up spiritually, and neither science nor religion are complete answers to that.
Noface
Jason DePolo
Posted almost 3 years ago
What is the importance of building transparency in news media, and what would like to see? Any risks?
I have to strongly disagree with the public financing of journalists. Major media outlets, I believe, are already under enough pressure from public figures to not be too critical of them,or at least not to be too critical of the system as a whole. After all, the networks need the politicians to come on their shows so that they can increase their ratings. Public funding would only serve to further muddy that water, not make it more transparent.