Page 167 of 359 FirstFirst ... 67117157163164165166167168169170171177217267 ... LastLast
Results 2,491 to 2,505 of 5385
  1. #2491
    "Comic Book Reviewer" InformationGeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    4,733

    Default

    And here comes Matt Gaetz to back Cotton at committing war crimes.

    Now that we clearly see Antifa as terrorists, can we hunt them down like we do those in the Middle East?

  2. #2492
    Mighty Member babyblob's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2018
    Location
    New Richmond Ohio
    Posts
    1,833

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ChadH View Post
    I consider myself to be fairly level-headed, but shit like this makes me nervous about what may happen in November.
    If he loses and there is any way the results could be contested, he may not step down.
    I am more worried about him trying to keep power through legal manipulation. He and his followers have been stacking the courts awhile. I think if he tries to keep power by force of arms he will fail. I dont see the military backing a man who lost a legal election. I could be wrong but I hope that we are not that far gone.
    Favorite teams. Alpha Flight, Avengers, Fantastic Four, West Coast Avengers, Justice Society of America, Legion of Superheroes.

  3. #2493
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    274

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babyblob View Post
    I am more worried about him trying to keep power through legal manipulation. He and his followers have been stacking the courts awhile. I think if he tries to keep power by force of arms he will fail. I dont see the military backing a man who lost a legal election. I could be wrong but I hope that we are not that far gone.
    these are thoughts logical people had the next day after the 2016 election

    He'll never leave unless forced to...period

  4. #2494
    Ultimate Member Mister Mets's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    12,240

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PaulBullion View Post
    Plurality is literally a synonym for "relative majority." It is a kind of majority. So she had the majority.

    What kind of teacher are you, anyway?
    I'm an English teacher. Let's start the lesson.

    According to Websters, the relevant definition of plurality is "a number of votes cast for a candidate in a contest of more than two candidates that is greater than the number cast for any other candidate but not more than half the total votes cast"

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plurality

    This matters in American elections because sometimes there are runoffs when candidates fail to reach an actual majority (a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total.) For example, one of the arguments that there were shenanigans in the Georgia 2018 gubernatorial elections isn't that a recanvassing would have shown that Stacey Abrams had more votes than Brian Kemp, but that it might have shown that he fell just short of the majority, which would have forced a runoff. If all the presidential candidates fail to win a majority of the electoral vote, the election goes to the House of Representatives, so it would stand to reason that any effort at instituting a national popular vote for President would take this into account lest we have a system in which someone is automatically president with a low percentage of the vote in a crowded field (IE- If libertatians have 2.9%, Republicans have 23%, Democrats have 24%, Socialists have 25% and Neonazis have 25.1%.)

    The phrase "relative majority" adds a qualifier absent from the initial comment. The point that Donald Trump did not win a majority was used to imply a lack of legitimacy. So it's relevant that Hillary Clinton did not win 50% plus one of the popular vote either.

    Quote Originally Posted by skyvolt2000 View Post
    Put it to you like this-if the majority of black voters especially in certain states went to the polls.

    A certain someone does not get in the White House.





    Many of those programs are already around. Some have been around for YEARS.

    One of the MAJOR issues is a lack of COMMUNICATION and PROMOTION of those programs.

    You will see some show up AFTER the fact.
    It is worth noting that African-Americans vote at high rates. Matthew Ygleisias describes how lecturing about voting is problematic as it's based on an untrue premise that African-Americans have conspicuously low turnout.

    African-Americans vote at higher rates than Asians or Latinos and if you adjust for education they vote at higher rates than white people. There’s no need to lecture them about participation, but also no non-participation mystery to explain.
    While looking for that comment, I came across another relevant point on the current arguments from Conor Friedersdorf of the Atlantic. He notes a problem with discussion about African-American voting preferences, the lack of differentiation in the media between what activists want and what the electorate wants.

    "I'm interested in the political demands of black activists and the preferences of the black electorate but I wish the NYT would stop conflating the two in a way that ellides Biden's wins of the black vote in so many primaries
    Last edited by Mister Mets; 06-01-2020 at 02:17 PM. Reason: broken quote box
    Sincerely,
    Thomas Mets

  5. #2495
    Astonishing Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by PwrdOn View Post
    The issues are fully entwined, because the police wouldn't dare to use that level of force if the suspects were primarily white. The dehumanization of black people and the us vs. them attitude that exists in way more police departments is one of the main reasons why they have become so heavily militarized over the years, there's a reason they didn't use force to disperse the lockdown protesters. For now, it does seem like the police response to these protests have been relatively restrained, but I'm guessing that's going to change very soon.
    From what I’ve seen, they don’t hesitate to use brutal force against white protesters and disagreeable non-black news media either, of which there have been numerous cases of in the last week. I suspect the War on Drugs started back in the 70s is what largely helped fuel the targeting of black people, as well as Mexican people such as being put in internment camps, in the last 50 years, and the communities that had been rightfully pushing back against them just led to the militarized police excusing themselves further to attack and use lethal force against black people more on sight (Trump calling black people “thugs” and encouraging to shoot anyone who simply loots on sight being examples) and more recently anyone that disagrees with them on sight. Again, racism and how it has systemically soaked into the police departments like liquid poison in a sponge shouldn’t be ignored, though neither should be any other possible motives of the police attacking others such as not agreeing with the news.
    Last edited by Electricmastro; 06-01-2020 at 12:37 PM.

  6. #2496
    Old school comic book fan WestPhillyPunisher's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Location
    Philadelphia, PA
    Posts
    21,309

    Default

    George Floyd died from 'asphyxiation from sustained pressure,' independent autopsy says

    Pressure as in an asshole rogue cop pressing his knee into Mr. Floyd’s neck.
    Avatar: Here's to the late, great Steve Dillon. Best. Punisher. Artist. EVER!

  7. #2497
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    274

    Default

    the countys medical examiner, who clearly lied, needs to be fired...then his license pulled

    then maybe arrested

  8. #2498
    Uncanny Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    30,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Electricmastro View Post
    Racism can play into it, but it has been informed to me that the militarization of the police is one of the main problems, such as the police using tear gas, which was originally developed for the US Army around World War I. The fact that many police departments have gotten to the point that they seem free to use things like tanks, assault rifles, submachine guns, flashbang grenades, grenade launchers, and sniper rifles anytime they want, even by racially motivated police officers, seems like an alarming concern in the first place.
    For what it's worth... there are studies that show that even though a black suspect is more likely to get shot than a white suspect, a black police officer is just as likely to shoot a black suspect as a white officer.

    Not sure that means anything.. but it could support the notion that there's more going on there than just race. Though for studies like this, I suppose you can read the results how you want to read them.

  9. #2499
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    274

    Default

    police departments dont need anti personnel carriers or modified decommissioned mine sweepers

  10. #2500

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Electricmastro View Post
    From what I’ve seen, they don’t hesitate to use brutal force against white protesters and disagreeable non-black news media either, of which there have been numerous cases of in the last week. I suspect the War on Drugs started back in the 70s is what largely helped fuel the targeting of black people, as well as Mexican people such as being put in internment camps, in the last 50 years, and the communities that had been rightfully pushing back against them just led to the militarized police excusing themselves further to attack and use lethal force against black people more on sight (Trump calling black people “thugs” and encouraging to shoot anyone who simply loots on sight being examples) and more recently anyone that disagrees with them on sight.
    Historically, it is interesting to look at the experience of the Jews, Mexicans and Chinese in America compared to Native Americans and Blacks. All of them (including the Irish, Italians, Polish, etc.) faced similar discrimination and violence from the authorities. However, the former today have integrated and prospered much better than the latter. Even gay rights and women's rights have made incredible progress in a few decades than a few centuries of Civil Rights for African Americans and Native Americans.

    I suspect a lot of this is due to the decimation and destruction of those communities. Jews, Italians, Irish and Chinese came here with strong communities while the Native Americans were outright wiped out and any progress among the descendants of the slaves was continually undercut and actively undermined by the authorities. Even during the Civil Rights movement while the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts were becoming law and segregation was ending, the most responsible factions attempting to create self-sustained and prosperous black communities were actively targeted by Federal Authorities as threats to National Security.

    So, even though I personally think the protests are irresponsible and especially that the looting and violence will harm any civil rights actions for a long time in the future, it is unrealistic to expect responsible public action from communities that have faced active degradation from authorities as well as from groups claiming to represent their interests and have been implicitly exploited economically by just about everyone for longer than I've been alive.

  11. #2501
    Extraordinary Member PaulBullion's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2017
    Posts
    7,039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Mets View Post
    I'm an English teacher. Let's start the lesson.

    According to Websters, the relevant definition of plurality is "a number of votes cast for a candidate in a contest of more than two candidates that is greater than the number cast for any other candidate but not more than half the total votes cast"

    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/plurality

    This matters in American elections because sometimes there are runoffs when candidates fail to reach an actual majority (a number or percentage equaling more than half of a total.) For example, one of the arguments that there were shenanigans in the Georgia 2018 gubernatorial elections isn't that a recanvassing would have shown that Stacey Abrams had more votes than Brian Kemp, but that it might have shown that he fell just short of the majority, which would have forced a runoff. If all the presidential candidates fail to win a majority of the electoral vote, the election goes to the House of Representatives, so it would stand to reason that any effort at instituting a national popular vote for President would take this into account lest we have a system in which someone is automatically president with a low percentage of the vote in a crowded field (IE- If libertatians have 2.9%, Republicans have 23%, Democrats have 24%, Socialists have 25% and Neonazis have 25.1%.)

    The phrase "relative majority" adds a qualifier absent from the initial comment. The point that Donald Trump did not win a majority was used to imply a lack of legitimacy. So it's relevant that Hillary Clinton did not win 50% plus one of the popular vote either.
    There are at least two kinds of majorities: An absolute majority, and a relative majority. A relative majority is a plurality.

    Absolute is also a qualifier.

    I am glad I had good English teachers.
    "How does the Green Goblin have anything to do with Herpes?" - The Dying Detective

    Hillary was right!

  12. #2502
    Astonishing Member Electricmastro's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Posts
    2,622

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by XPac View Post
    For what it's worth... there are studies that show that even though a black suspect is more likely to get shot than a white suspect, a black police officer is just as likely to shoot a black suspect as a white officer.

    Not sure that means anything.. but it could support the notion that there's more going on there than just race. Though for studies like this, I suppose you can read the results how you want to read them.
    Again, I don’t deny the evidence that objectively proves that police officers are more quick to attack black people more than anyone else, but at the same time, reasonings that fuel the pathetic excuses for the police to attack black people, not simply racism, but also destructive mindsets poisoning their approaches such as “black people are more likely to be violent thugs,” going back to what Trump calling them thugs and justifying shooting looters, and using that as justification to justify their means shouldn’t be ignored, nor should attacking reporters they disagree with be ignored either. If we’re going to talk about racism and police brutality in general, then we might as well have an academic discussion about its structure, as poisonous it can be, so as to better understand how it can be better dismantled and discuss possible solutions that can potentially result in less human beings getting hurt and have improved quality of life in the future. Escalating corruption and military power also isn’t obligated to have limits after all.
    Last edited by Electricmastro; 06-01-2020 at 01:14 PM.

  13. #2503
    Uncanny Member XPac's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    30,276

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by A Small Talent For War View Post
    Historically, it is interesting to look at the experience of the Jews, Mexicans and Chinese in America compared to Native Americans and Blacks. All of them (including the Irish, Italians, Polish, etc.) faced similar discrimination and violence from the authorities. However, the former today have integrated and prospered much better than the latter. Even gay rights and women's rights have made incredible progress in a few decades than a few centuries of Civil Rights for African Americans and Native Americans.

    I suspect a lot of this is due to the decimation and destruction of those communities. Jews, Italians, Irish and Chinese came here with strong communities while the Native Americans were outright wiped out and any progress among the descendants of the slaves was continually undercut and actively undermined by the authorities. Even during the Civil Rights movement while the Voting Rights and Civil Rights Acts were becoming law and segregation was ending, the most responsible factions attempting to create self-sustained and prosperous black communities were actively targeted by Federal Authorities as threats to National Security.

    So, even though I personally think the protests are irresponsible and especially that the looting and violence will harm any civil rights actions for a long time in the future, it is unrealistic to expect responsible public action from communities that have faced active degradation from authorities as well as from groups claiming to represent their interests and have been implicitly exploited economically by just about everyone for longer than I've been alive.
    It's sort of interesting, because in a lot of ways blacks have integrated less but in a lot of ways they have also integrated more.

    We've had a black president before we've had a chinesse or mexican one. Of any minority group, you can make a pretty good arguement there's been bigger more sucessful black actors, musicians, and athletes over any other minority group. They're the most descriminated against minority group .. but in a lot of tangible ways they're also the most sucessful. It's sort of an interesting contrast.

  14. #2504
    Extraordinary Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Location
    With the Orishas
    Posts
    6,421

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Godzilla2099 View Post
    I feel sorry for Mr Floyd's Family and Friends, but that's it. Its easy for you to say when you can do that from a distance. I have to move my wife down to Philly so she can finish her fellowship. Its horrible there. Every time I walk into a gas station or try to get a quick bit to eat, I get rushed being asked for money. If I refuse, many times they get hostile. I can only imagine how more 'friendly' they'll be now

    We used to put the Japanese in Camps. Today, the extreme majority of Americans won't blink twice if somebody from Japan moves next door. They worked hard, raised their kids right, didn't cause trouble, and believed in the American Dream. It wasn't easy but they did it.

    Inciting Violence and blaming others all the time isn't the way to do it.
    Ah... the model immigrant myth.

    I would suggest you read up on this myth. There were distinct advantages that were handed to Asians that weren’t given to blacks. Most Asians came to America as migrant workers after the World War, Black people were economically redlined until the 1960s and the after effects are still being felt.

    Perhaps if the US didn’t rail road Black people forcefully and violently into poverty after the Reconstruction we could be telling a different story today.
    Last edited by Username taken; 06-01-2020 at 01:18 PM.
    "Obviously not all conservatives are racists/bigots but all racists/bigots claim to be conservative"- Unknown

    "Are we saying that Black people can't say their lives matter?"- Michael Jai White

  15. #2505
    Intermediary
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    274

    Default

    local business owner MURDERED by police, had fed police for free

    McAtee, 53, operated a barbecue business at one of the West End's most popular corners, especially on the weekends. But those who knew the chef said he was known to cook at several community events across the areas nine neighborhoods.

    "Mr. McAtee would help us with Californian Day for at least 15 years if not longer," Greg Cotton, Jr., who lives in Middletown, said in an interview on Monday. "He was one of the ones who would donate all his time and all his food, everybody could just come up and take it and he wouldn't charge because it was for the neighborhood."

    McAtee's mother and his nephew told The Courier Journal that he was known to feed the police as well. The two said he could give law enforcement offices free meals.

    "He fed them free," Riley said. "He fed the police and didn't charge them nothing."

    "My son was a good son. All he did on that barbecue corner is try to make a dollar for himself and his family," she added. "And they come along and they killed my son."

Posting Permissions

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