Page 232 of 525 FirstFirst ... 132182222228229230231232233234235236242282332 ... LastLast
Results 3,466 to 3,480 of 7869
  1. #3466
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    I saw them wear that and was 100% sure it was the idea of the Congressional Black Caucus.

    Of course, both MAGA twitter and Red Carnation twitter were OUTRAGED at the gesture, assuming it was the idea of Pelosi and Nadler. Which, of course, it wasn't, it was the CBC.


    People should be a lot more outraged by Republican corruption, bigotry, divisiveness and fiscal disasters than attempts at cultural exchange.

    America has missed out on a lot of it's potential by not fully embracing the diversity of it's citizenry.
    Last edited by aja_christopher; 06-08-2020 at 11:52 AM.

  2. #3467
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    7,220

    Default

    In financial news:

    The US economy entered a recession in February—before the lockdown and stay at home orders. This is Trump’s recession. It only took him three years to destroy Obama’s growth.
    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

  3. #3468
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    7,542

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    I should put money on the next Republican president doing it in two years since they seem to get progressively worse.

    Nixon vs. Reagan being a toss up since you could argue the difference was that Reagan got away with his crimes and Nixon didn't.

    Bush Sr betrayed their principles so it's hard to know how to place him.

    And Cheney and Rumsfield were worse than Bush Jr while Trump could do far worse in a second term.

    Best to just call it systemic corruption within the party itself.
    Last edited by aja_christopher; 06-08-2020 at 12:29 PM.

  4. #3469
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    7,220

    Default

    Aw man.

    I guess this explained why playing an asshole in his first appearances came so natural to him.

    Hartley Sawyer Fired From 'The Flash' After Racist, Misogynist Tweets Surface

    The actor has played Ralph Dibny on The CW series for the past three seasons.
    Actor Hartley Sawyer has been fired from The Flash after a host of his tweets containing misogynist and racist references were surfaced in the past week.

    The tweets, all from before he joined The CW series, make references to sexual assault and contain racist and homophobic language. Sawyer's Twitter account has been deleted, but screenshots of the old posts have circulated online in the past two weeks.
    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

  5. #3470

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by AnakinFlair View Post
    I thought it was the North Hollywood Shootout in 97 that changed things. It seems like that, everyday officers suddenly had access to AR-15s.

    EDIT: Okay, I read about the Norco shootout, which I had never heard of (probably because it happened several months before I was born). It feels like the North Hollywood shooters took notes from the Norco shootout and, sadly, found ways to improve on what had been done before.
    A fine analysis. Yes.
    X-Books Forum Mutant Tracker/FAQ- Updated every Tuesday.

  6. #3471
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by worstblogever View Post
    Without a quantity, the answer you're looking for is, "FAR TOO F***ING OFTEN."

    Norway's cops go a decade without killing ANYBODY. America's cops do it multiple times a day.

    If nurses can restrain patients without using a chokehold, a cop should be able to.
    There is a difference between George Floyd and a man attacking deputies with a pipe (the most recent story in the Washington Post police database.)

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/graph...ings-database/

    https://www.wate.com/news/top-storie...ntress-county/

    Many of the deaths are not all that controversial.

    There is a discussion we're probably going to have to have as a society about whether we should insist that police officers accept a nontrivial chance of death and serious injury in order to avoid taking the life of the person attacking them, under the logic that a police officer is not worth so much more than a mentally ill person, but that is not going to be an easy or popular discussion.

    Quote Originally Posted by worstblogever View Post
    Not putting assault rifles out there would justify defunding police departments of their militarized budgets, to be sure. Everything started to trend in the cops and public waving bigger and bigger weapons at each other... if there's an event to point to where things changed, it's probably the Norco shootout of 1980. The police were outgunned by the criminals, and argued since to always be ready to bring in bigger hardware.

    Except now, they have friggin LRADs going onto the streets of Portland and Seattle. Sonic cannons that can cause permanent loss of hearing. For peaceful protesters.
    The majority of homicides aren't due to assault rifles, so taking those off the streets will have a negligible effect. A majority of gun-related homicides are handguns.

    https://www.statista.com/statistics/...y-weapon-used/

    If stronger gun control legislation is going to be part of the effort to reform the police, there is the follow-up question of who the abolish the police crowd wants enforcing gun laws.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  7. #3472
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,407

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sammy_hansen View Post
    Iím loosening up my eyes, preparing for the eye-roll which will induced by the conservative retort to this.
    Are you suggesting your view is that Rosa is so obviously correct that any response will be embarrassing?


    Quote Originally Posted by Rosa Luxemburg View Post
    You're far less likely than a black person to be killed by the police, but statistically you are still more likely to be killed by a cop than a serial killer, terrorist, or mass shooter.

    Police Killed More People Last Year Than Mass Shooters
    First, people's chances of being killed by police aren't random. The discussion seems to be conflating egregious abuses, which are rarer, with every situation in which an armed suspect is killed by police (usually, a more understandable situation.)

    You also do seem to leave out a lot of other forms of homicide.

    In 2018, there were an estimated 16,214 homicides in the United States.
    https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s...er%20in%202009.

    In that same year, the police shot and killed about 1,000 people, 96 percent of whom were armed.
    https://investigativereportingworksh...-1000-in-2018/

    The statistic does not include people killed by police who weren't shot by police, but even if it's also nearly a 1,000 people, homicides will still exceed death by police by 8 to 1.

    Quote Originally Posted by Rosa Luxemburg View Post
    They disproportionately shoot and kill black people.



    It's not that white people need to live in fear of cops or that they are likely to be killed by cops, but that while cops are said to exist to protect people, they are actually more likely to kill you than things we identify as threats.

    We identify serial killers, terrorists, and mass shooters as threats to the public. The police need to viewed as a threat to the public, as they cause more violence.
    According to this logic, we should identify cars as major threats because so many more people die in car accidents.

    https://ohs***********/articles/2019...2017%20figures.

    Fortunately, the country has more police officers than it does terrorists, mass shooters, and serial killers, so the odds you'll be killed by an individual police officer are also significantly lower than the odds of being the victim of a particular mass shooter, which is going to have serious policy implications when gauging whether police officers are more dangerous than serial killers.
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  8. #3473
    Astonishing Member Darkspellmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    Yeah, I've seen people like Boyega and Sterling talking about it -- as well as Balotelli out in Italy and basically any player out in Russia or Eastern Europe.

    China and Japan likewise have their human rights issues as do many nations in the Middle East and Africa.

    People will get it together eventually -- at least now people can see and read for themselves what's happening in the world and respond accordingly.

    One video changed the world -- at least for the short term if not for generations to come.

    As the speed of the exchange of information increases it's possible that the evolution of human thought will do the same in turn.
    It's a tough thing to fully navigate since raceism and bigotry comes in all sorts of forms. One big issue is the idea of power as well. If there was a way so that police don't feel they have power over the community but rather feel that they are being nurturing to the community then maybe you would see a change in who applies for the job. Or rather why.

    And totally agree that human thought and views can change fast. It takes time for people to learn and communicate with others, and I think education is a huge step towards this. Not just nationally here but also understanding the international community and culture of the globe.

  9. #3474
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    Fortunately, the country has more police officers than it does terrorists, mass shooters, and serial killers, so the odds you'll be killed by an individual police officer are also significantly lower than the odds of being the victim of a particular mass shooter, which is going to have serious policy implications when gauging whether police officers are more dangerous than serial killers.
    in a week of mostly peaceful protests - more than 350+ on video incidents of police attacking peaceful protestors, press, legal aid observers, medical staff, even people on their own front yards

    as recent as last night, Seattle PD tear gassed an entire intersection

    this country has long had a problem with badge wearing murderers who are much more interested in compliance than serving or protecting

    from the McDuffy riots to Rodney King to Trayvon Martin to Sandra Bland and on and on and on

  10. #3475
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    324

    Default

    the last 3 men who were Chairmen of The Joint Chiefs

    a total of about 60+ years of military experience have all condemned The Idiot

    anyone still supporting him needs to be shamed and excoriated

  11. #3476
    Mighty Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,024

    Default

    How To Keep Our Children Safe: A Mother Explains Why We Must Defund Police

    Over the last decade, and in particular during the Obama Administration, there was a spectacular breadth of reform initiatives that have just as spectacularly failed: anti-bias trainings, diversified departments, body cams and particularly cynical, in Minneapolis, an early-warning system so that problem officers could be identified. Derek Chauvin, the cop who killed George Floyd, had nearly 20 complaints filed against him. Maybe the early-warning system beeper thingamajig gave out after the first 10 and the information was lost? Whatever the case, what was true at the birth of Black Lives Matter in 2013 is still true today: African Americans are at least three times as likely to be killed by police as our white counterparts.

    This is because the idea of reforming the institution of policing—and it’s important to understand it as an institution as opposed to the one bad apple scenario—has a critical design flaw. It ignores the fundamental role of police in Black communities. For us, their role is not heroic but harmful—when not outright deadly.
    This is not the case for the white child in the middle-income or wealthy community who is clearly disruptive. Before police are asked to intervene, school counselors, special programming and mental health professionals are called upon to nurture, support and protect him. They know that only as a final resort should police be involved because, to them, that white child’s life matters. For Black people, though, police are our first responders. They’re often the only responders but not in the ways media attempts to spoon feed the concept to us. These first responders have never cared for and protected us nor our children. No, their role is what police in the United States have always been instructed to do with Black people: contain us. We’re a problem to be controlled.

    The things that we know undercut our lives, though—the absence of jobs, quality schools, health care, green spaces—are rarely considered problematic enough to fix. Not only do these things fall off our nation’s so-called leaders’ urgent needs list, they fall off the radar for we whose collective humanity has never been honored either in detail nor broad stroke. Imagine a world, though, where there was a true commitment to repair some of the harm done to Black people, from slavery to Jim Crow to being targeted for incarceration; from voter disenfranchisement to work and housing discrimination. That world is possible, and one way for us to create it is to defund an institution that by both design and practice, means to ensure we will never realize it.
    Nationwide, more than 100 billion dollars are spent on police departments, with some cities spending fully 50 percent of their budgets on law enforcement even when crime levels are historically lower. And of those dollars, billions are spent to further militarize local law enforcement. Local police agencies are literally trained to go to war against the very people their public relations teams say that they are sworn to protect. It’s the most basic conflict of interest. And while all of this is happening, there has been a devastating divestment from the institutions that are proven to provide security: schools and hospitals, parks and arts centers.
    Demand your legislator prove that they are spending dollars in actual service of the public—the whole public. Demand that they prove that proper dollars have been allocated for that which is actually proven to not only keep communities safe, but ensure that they prosper. Demand that with every dollar spent they are putting the lives of children at the center of the decision.

    Because we cannot afford to be under any illusions. The funding of police requires the defunding of critical social needs. This means that rather than creating safety, police departments are unrepentantly structured to destroy it—and this would be true even if no cop ever killed another Black person again.
    I really enjoyed her article it explains this concept in a way that will have to be done over and over again. Because, on the face it sounds like asking for No police at all just anarchy. But, there is a lot of sense honestly. There is only so much money to go around. We give a lot of money to both the military and policing.

  12. #3477
    Astonishing Member Darkspellmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    I saw them wear that and was 100% sure it was the idea of the Congressional Black Caucus.

    Of course, both MAGA twitter and Red Carnation twitter were OUTRAGED at the gesture, assuming it was the idea of Pelosi and Nadler. Which, of course, it wasn't, it was the CBC.
    Intresting backstories about the Kente cloth, depending on area and tribes indicate that the Akan saw it as use by kings in times of great importance and ceremony. Version of the cloth have meaning in the colors.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kente_cloth

    I know some are saying that it's a meaningless Gesture but given the history of it, I would say it's a strong move on the CBC to have all Dems wear this as it shows a sense of unity at least within the Dem House group.

  13. #3478
    Astonishing Member Darkspellmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by aja_christopher View Post
    Not sure why it should be an issue -- I'd love to rock some traditional Chinese clothing while I led the nation.

    Straight Kung Fu Theater.

    Flanked by a squad of secret servicemen in military grade ninja armor.

    But that never will happen when black presidents still get called out for wearing tan suits so it's your loss.

    Edit: Obama has the patience to deal with playing political games and I don't.
    Dude, wear it, just make sure you know the meaning behind anything of traditional garb and respect it.

  14. #3479
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    324

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Darkspellmaster View Post
    Intresting backstories about the Kente cloth, depending on area and tribes indicate that the Akan saw it as use by kings in times of great importance and ceremony. Version of the cloth have meaning in the colors.

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kente_cloth

    I know some are saying that it's a meaningless Gesture but given the history of it, I would say it's a strong move on the CBC to have all Dems wear this as it shows a sense of unity at least within the Dem House group.
    I saw it as a bit pandering

    (im black BTW)

  15. #3480
    Astonishing Member Darkspellmaster's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    3,141

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MiddleMan View Post
    I saw it as a bit pandering

    (im black BTW)
    How is it pandering? I mean within the context of them using it to show a unified front for at least trying to show respect towards the requests of their fellow Congressmen and women. It would probably be worse if headlines read they refused to do it.
    Last edited by Darkspellmaster; 06-08-2020 at 01:14 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •