|
Random Politics & Religion #00
By Enuyasha 2015-06-09 16:14:49
Calling in a bomb threat is the easiest way to get out of work or school that I can think of.
Getting out of it for 15-20, sure. My college loopholes that with leaving the option at the hands of the instructors at the time of the incident.
But yea, claiming incompetence because of a bomb threat is a reach :<
Lakshmi.Sparthosx said: »Are they not supposed to take a bomb threat seriously?
"Hey guys, it's just some teenager again. Nothing to see...*boom*
WHY DIDNT OBAMA PERSONALLY EVACUATE THE WEST WING??? Thats exactly how it would play on FOX :<
Did you see how hard they went after the mayor of Baltimore for a misplaced coma in her statement? And then after that when she like expresses "Thats not what i said"(You know every laymen knew she meant to say "Not what i meant" and knew exactly what she meant)?
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :<
Garuda.Chanti
Server: Garuda
Game: FFXI
Posts: 11398
By Garuda.Chanti 2015-06-09 16:39:12
....
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :< I don't watch TV.
If I did watch TV I wouldn't watch Fox.
By fonewear 2015-06-09 16:50:22
....
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :< I don't watch TV.
If I did watch TV I wouldn't watch Fox.
TV isn't so bad beats having to talk to people !
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3621
By Shiva.Onorgul 2015-06-09 17:14:20
It is heteronormative. It's also sexist. Those aren't two mutually exclusive concepts. They're not mutually exclusive concepts? So what?
What was sexist? Assuming that their daughter was going to still be female in a couple years?
Words have specific meanings. English has the largest lexicon on the planet exactly to accommodate that premise. Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on the perceived gender (and sometimes actual sex) of a person. Assuming that a cis-gendered female is going to be heterosexual is not sexist. Sex and sexuality are not the same thing.
Would you please actually explain what was sexist rather than what was heteronormative? Or are you taking a playbook from Korpg and Nausi on this one and going to deflect until I get bored (too late, I already am)?
[+]
By Enuyasha 2015-06-09 17:21:07
....
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :< I don't watch TV.
If I did watch TV I wouldn't watch Fox.
TV isn't so bad beats having to talk to people ! To be fair, we purposefully watched FOX to make fun of their coverage, then watched other networks when we got tired of that to see the different coverage. They all pretty much jumped on the word play angle really quick, but FOX was the first to do it (Because their professional semantics players and loved to rip apart the statement on basis of excluded grammar to "What she said" instead of knowing "what she meant"). But anyway, old topic is old.
By Jetackuu 2015-06-09 17:24:16
Specifically, EST, where the work gets done. Not PST, where the hippies roll out of bed at 11:00 and call it 8:00. What about EDT?
Bahamut.Kara
Server: Bahamut
Game: FFXI
Posts: 3544
By Bahamut.Kara 2015-06-10 06:23:48
It is heteronormative. It's also sexist. Those aren't two mutually exclusive concepts. They're not mutually exclusive concepts? So what?
What was sexist? Assuming that their daughter was going to still be female in a couple years?
Words have specific meanings. English has the largest lexicon on the planet exactly to accommodate that premise. Sexism is prejudice or discrimination based on the perceived gender (and sometimes actual sex) of a person. Assuming that a cis-gendered female is going to be heterosexual is not sexist. Sex and sexuality are not the same thing.
Would you please actually explain what was sexist rather than what was heteronormative? Or are you taking a playbook from Korpg and Nausi on this one and going to deflect until I get bored (too late, I already am)? Are gender stereotypes not sexist anymore?
I must have missed that memo.
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 06:25:13
I sent out a gender stereotype memo this morning you must have missed it !
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 08:38:26
In racism news:
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/americas_war_on_black_girls_why_mckinney_police_violence_isnt_about_one_bad_apple/
TLDR: ( I know you didn't read this) Here is a video of the incident
Cop takes a young black teen to the grass inherent racism obvious !
YouTube Video Placeholder
In just over two months, we will commemorate the 10th anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, a natural disaster that ravaged communities along the Gulf Coast. This tragedy was made infinitely worse not only by decades of governmental neglect and far-ranging poverty, but also by the fact that so many Black people could not swim.
That nearly 60 percent of Black people cannot swim is directly attributable to decades of segregated pool facilities in this country. While that problem ostensibly went away with the desegregation efforts of the mid-20th century, de facto segregation of pool facilities persists to this day, because community pools are now largely private amenities in suburban neighborhoods that many Black youth don’t have access to.
This is the backdrop of the troubling and traumatizing incident that occurred in McKinney, Texas, a suburb of Dallas, over the weekend, when 19-year-old Tatiana Rose threw a pool party and invited several friends to use the community pool in her neighborhood. Many of those friends were Black, and many of those Black friends also live in the neighborhood. At some point, as Tatiana says in a video interview, two white adult women began yelling at her and her friends to “go back where they came from,” “back to section 8 housing,” and calling them “black ***.” When a 14-year-old girl responded, the women further ridiculed her, prompting Tatiana to tell the adults that the girl was 14 and their comments were inappropriate. According to Tatiana’s account, the white women then approached her; one “hit her in the face” and the other began participating in the attack.
According to reports, multiple calls came into police. At least one call came from either Tatiana, her mother (who was present) or her friends, reporting that these white women had attacked the partygoers. Other calls came in from residents who reported that many Black children who were unauthorized to be there were there and fighting. Apparently, the party got larger and some children jumped over the fence to get to the party.
When the McKinney PD showed up, Officer David Eric Casebolt arrived on the scene out of control. He yelled and cursed at teenagers, who were unarmed, many of them wearing swimming trunks and bathing suits. He approached a 14-year-old girl and wrestled her to the ground as she cried and called for her mom. Even after she was seated, crying and clearly subdued, he grabbed her braids, demanded that she get on her face, and then kneeled on top of her where he remained for several minutes. It is unclear what this child did to elicit such ire, but what she did not do was verbally threaten the officer, wave a gun at him, or present a physical threat — as she is, by the look of it, just around 100 pounds, and he is a fully grown man.
When her friends attempted to come to her aid, the officer drew his gun, and waved it at them wildly and haphazardly, prompting two other officers to come over and indicate that this was inappropriate behavior. The officer stopped pointing his gun, but took several more seconds of holding it, before finally placing it back in the holster.
He has been suspended. The two adult white women who started this confrontation by reportedly slapping Tatiana Rose in the face have not been arrested or charged. A young 14-year old girl is traumatized, and a community who rallied at the police department on Monday night is outraged.
Meanwhile, many residents of the community are thankful to the police for “keeping them safe,” as one sign reportedly posted at the pool the next day said. The rest of us are now forced to endure the deeply dishonest and irrational kind of conversation on race that proceeds from the mouth of far too many white folk after these kinds of incidents occur — with stunning regularity, I might add.
Among more well-meaning interlocutors are those who keep pointing out that David Casebolt is a bad apple. “He has been suspended,” they say. What we know for sure is that a suspension is not a clear indicator that charges, the loss of a job, or a criminal conviction are forthcoming.
Moreover, people continue to deploy the “one bad apple spoils a bunch” analogy as though the predicate of the sentence is of no consequence. Spoils. The analogy is less about the singular bad apple and more about its multiplicative bad effects on those it keeps company with. I agree that David Casebolt was particularly out of control. I agree that the other officers saw that and got him to stop waving his gun. They did not keep him from kneeling on top of the girl or berating and intimidating the other youth. This means that in a scenario where multiple children were being unfairly treated, the presence of multiple officers did not offer them substantial protection in the face one officer becoming entirely rogue.
Those officers did not demand that their colleague take a breather while they got the situation under control. They let him go on and on, half-cocked and ridiculous. The material impact of that was a bunch of children feeling unsafe and traumatized by those sworn to protect them.
The 15-year-old white kid who recorded this incident on his smartphone made it clear that what he saw was a bunch of police mistreating his Black friends, while leaving him alone entirely. For the white people who need to hear it, yes, his presence indicates that “not all white people” are racist. Clearly his parents are doing a good job raising an anti-racist teen. But if the white people who need to hear such things hope to float their consciences to safety on the back of this one kid, the ride might be bumpy. Again we don’t combat racism just by raising our children to have anti-racist attitudes. We also have to confront the systematic residential segregation and privatization that makes pools inaccessible to children who don’t have the privilege of living in suburbs.
Few white people have stood up and called out the white adult women who harassed a fellow neighbor having a pool party with her friends, and with her mother’s permission. But many white people have watched the video and concluded that the officer’s treatment of the 14-year-old girl was justified. The gender dynamics in this moment are interesting. There is no universe in which a police officer would drag a young white girl in a two-piece bathing suit by her hair, demand she put her face on the ground, and then kneel for several minutes on top of her adolescent body. If such a thing occurred, it would elicit massive moral outrage on the part of white people (and Black people, too).
But Black girls are never deemed feminine enough for their sexual and adolescent vulnerability to register for white people. They are frequently viewed as aggressors by both police and regular citizens alike, even for doing very adolescent things like mouthing off to those in authority. This is the reason why education scholars suggest that Black girls are suspended from school six times as often as white girls, because even simple adolescent forms of testing boundaries are perceived as far more aggressive based on race.
And let me be clear: Citizens have the right to “mouth off” to police. We have the right to question how we are being treated, why we are being arrested, why we are even being approached. Far too many police deploy accusations of disturbing the peace or obstructing justice to quiet citizens who question them within legal bounds. As long as we don’t threaten or enact physical harm on police officers, we can “mouth off” all we want. We don’t have to be polite to police officers, and they clearly have very little interest in being polite to us. And for those who keep demanding that we act civilly, the point is, “incivility” is not a crime.
If it were, half of America’s police forces would be behind bars.
Moreover, the violent incivility of the white women who harassed and physically assaulted these teenagers who had every right to be there escapes notice. White women have been some of the worst perpetrators of racial aggression and racial indignity in this country, but their aggressions frequently escape notice, precisely because white womanhood and the need to protect it animates the core of so much white supremacist aggression toward Black people. The domestic sphere, much to the chagrin of my fellow feminists, has long been considered the sacred domain of white women. Many a Black man was lynched in service of protecting white women’s domestic sanctity and sexual virtue. Meanwhile, white women have been emboldened by such a system for centuries to police, demean and humiliate Black people, and Black women in particular, within domestic spaces.
But you won’t see white feminists contextualizing or calling out this long history of white female bullying of Black women with less social, political or economic power than them. They leave that work to Black feminists. Meanwhile, I hope that Black men begin to understand that they don’t have a monopoly on being violently mistreated by police. Black girls are brutalized, too.
And to continue to tell Black people — as many white folks and respectable black folk on the social media threads I participated in have said — that if these children “would have just done what the officers said, none of this would have happened,” is to be deeply invested in exercises of racial ignorance. Proper behavior has never, ever protected Black people from police.
Most of these children came to a pool party with an invite, got harassed and physically assaulted by white residents who didn’t want them to be there, and then mistreated by the police. The ones who didn’t have an invite came because perhaps it was a rare opportunity to get in a clean, safe swimming pool in the heat of a Texas summer. Good policing could have dealt with this matter sans violence and without incident.
But that didn’t happen here.
Instead, the police mistreated these teens (including those who had been invited) because they started by giving the white residents the benefit of the doubt, even though good credible evidence suggests that white racial aggression spurred this incident in the first place. But Black children and Black people are never given the benefit of the doubt. We are policed first, and only ever apologized to later, if at all.
White people in the aggregate value the “safety” of their private, segregated, residential spaces far more than they value a system of policing that protects and values all lives equally. It is clear that the anxiety that many white suburban residents feel about having their communities “overrun” by Black people feels far more “traumatizing” to them than having to stand idly by while a few teens get roughed up by the police. If the cost of making white people safe is more than a few Black communities being systematically traumatized and made always to feel unsafe, then so be it. The notion of white safety has its foundations in Indigenous, Black and Brown unsafety. Until white people begin to question the violent origins of such a concept, the police will continue in the name of “white safety” to go around terrorizing communities of color, mostly with impunity.
[+]
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-06-10 09:31:23
Are gender stereotypes not sexist anymore?
I must have missed that memo.
you missed it while you were barefoot and pregnant in the kitchen making milamber a sandwich!!!
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-06-10 09:33:39
please spoiler those walls of text foney...
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 09:36:22
Done as a white man I'm outraged that black girls can't attend a pool party without a racist cop bringing them down !
I anxiously await people protesting in front of pools both public and private. Al Sharpton you have been put on notice. This harkens back to the days when blacks had to go to separate diners to eat. Are we heading towards white and black only pools. I think so !
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-06-10 09:45:06
I liked it when he fell down....
supercop junior needs a good long sit in the time out corner...what an idiot. I'm glad nobody was seriously injured when he tried to arrest a hundred teenagers all by himself
By fonewear 2015-06-10 09:45:24
This all could have been avoided with a simple sign near the pool:
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-06-10 09:45:32
What was sexist? Assuming that their daughter was going to still be female in a couple years?
No, what was sexist was assuming that what is important to her now would become secondary to hormonal urges. It may be typical for girls to be interested in boys, but it is sexist to assume that interest will trump everything else.
By fonewear 2015-06-10 09:46:05
I liked it when he fell down....
supercop junior needs a good long sit in the time out corner...what an idiot. I'm glad nobody was seriously injured when he tried to arrest a hundred teenagers all by himself
The little ninja roll at the beginning let you know this cop doesn't *** around he is hardcore about enforcing pool protocols !
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 09:49:52
YouTube Video Placeholder
By fonewear 2015-06-10 09:53:21
I think he tripped but I like to think he did that on purpose.
Rumor has it he drank 10 five hour energy drinks before responding to the call !
[+]
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-06-10 09:55:15
I liked it when he fell down....
supercop junior needs a good long sit in the time out corner...what an idiot. I'm glad nobody was seriously injured when he tried to arrest a hundred teenagers all by himself
The little ninja roll at the beginning let you know this cop doesn't *** around he is hardcore about enforcing pool protocols !
and that he probably drank a "big gulp" full of mountain dew to wash down a handful of amphetamines that morning...
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 10:00:07
I think in general the type of person that wants to be a cop attracts a lot of jerk ***. Or they become jerks from being a cop.
[+]
By Ramyrez 2015-06-10 10:03:23
I think in general the type of person that wants to be a cop attracts a lot of jerk ***. Or they become jerks from being a cop.
Yeah. And a lot of them are former military folks who went from high school football to military to civ life and got their civil service law enforcement jobs thanks to boosted test scores and veteran's preference with civil service comissions.
There are a lot of great cops out there, and they deserve credit, and you will never hear me say otherwise about the profession as a whole. And to be honest, many times those people are the best for the positions with their backgrounds. BUT...law enforcement positions are sort of uniquely tailored to letting a bunch of meatheads into the ranks and there's really no way to prevent that. And sometimes those meatheads are still holding onto that popular high school bully mentality.
[+]
Garuda.Chanti
Server: Garuda
Game: FFXI
Posts: 11398
By Garuda.Chanti 2015-06-10 10:07:22
....
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :< I don't watch TV.
If I did watch TV I wouldn't watch Fox.
TV isn't so bad beats having to talk to people ! I use video games for that.
No commercials, just product placement.
By fonewear 2015-06-10 10:11:11
....
That was like the most enraging thing i ever saw on FOX ever :< I don't watch TV.
If I did watch TV I wouldn't watch Fox.
TV isn't so bad beats having to talk to people ! I use video games for that.
No commercials, just product placement.
I like to have the background noise of a TV while I'm reading on the computer. So I don't really get bothered by commercials.
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 10:11:52
In case anyone is wondering that cop has resigned. Rumor has it he is heading to Ferguson to work !
Server: Shiva
Game: FFXI
Posts: 20130
By Shiva.Nikolce 2015-06-10 10:15:26
Or they become jerks from being a cop.
I tell you what, watch out for the short ones.
every one of them has a napoleon complex and a chip the size of a redwood tree on both shoulders...
[+]
VIP
Server: Odin
Game: FFXI
Posts: 9534
By Odin.Jassik 2015-06-10 10:48:26
Or they become jerks from being a cop.
I tell you what, watch out for the short ones.
every one of them has a napoleon complex and a chip the size of a redwood tree on both shoulders...
I've found young and or short police officers are the ones that have something to prove, and the short ones have been much more hostile if I'm standing than if I'm sitting. I guess you could make a case for the intimidation factor of adding a large size difference to the already dangerous situation of making contact with a "suspect", but if you are that distrustful of tall people, maybe just don't harass them for being in a public area?
Server: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 88
By Siren.Fattynoob 2015-06-10 11:05:19
Hillary has too much Benghazi on her from the plebian laymen side of the uninformed voter pool so maybe Bernie will get it cause he actually does seem to want what a lot of voters seem to want.
Uninformed voter's would think she did everything perfectly in that situation. However the fact that it was a failure in leadership absolutely tells us how well she would do as POTUS. Did you even watch the hearings? I suppose not. You probably believe they were complete investigations also, even though emails had not been received until February 2015. Had Gowdy not been so thorough America still wouldn't even know about Clintons secret spy network and private communication paid for by U.S. Tax payers.
Benghazi is the least of corrupt Clinton's concerns. I would think being bribed by foreign governments much more dangerous to her campaign. There is a reason she doesn't field reporters questions.
At this point she is merely a distraction from whoever the real democratic candidate will be. Much like Obama in 2008. I can't believe anyone other than crazed feminists or low-information voters would support her.
There isn't a viable candidate out there yet for either party. Just more pro-establishment, pro-wall street, sell out America candidates. I dont think you know what an Uninformed voter is, no really. An uninformed voter votes on the feels (Such as, "Shes a woman","He's going to make pot legal","She let them boys die in that ther Benghazi",etc.) while an informed voter keeps up with statements,ideologies, and pretty much knows the candidates they dont and do want to vote for (an involved citizen of this here 'merica). An uninformed voter gets to claim ignorance because they actually dont know who they are voting for whereas your normal voter would have somewhat of an idea on who they believe the person they are voting for stands for. The problem with this country is you have a bunch of either uninformed voters or knee-jerk independents that vote one way or the other because they are told what to feel and they go with what is first presented to them.
The way you use the term itself it seems like its an inappropriate word substitution. And then if you get into like, the actual things in your post, you cant really blame Clinton for using an illegal legal spy network because it fell under TPA if it used a "national security" tag. This is largely the information that no one seems to get, it may be "Illegal" but "technically" it is "Legal" because there is a law that loopholes the law against justifying it. You get rid of the law, you then make things done under this law full on illegal again no questions, You cannot have both without the other happening first.
Now as far as TPA goes it did expire, but it only gained a new form in new legislation.
But lets face it, the most tangible argument anyone in the debate is going to have against Clinton is Benghazi allegations, and you cant win an election by shouting buzz words at the top of your lungs hoping everyone believes you. Romney tried it (The pitiful little attempt at a gotcha question as he could have ever attempted as it was), failed, now his party is using the same tag line as if its in any way relevant.
As far as the legitimacy of any "Investigation" may have gone it was entirely fruitless a venture as any to try and pin anyone to the event because it was literally an attack suit which ultimately wasted more of the tax payers dollars then it actually had to. What happened was definitely a tragedy, trying to claim it was intentional or negligence was had is just going to be grabbing for straws if you dont have anything tangible that leads to that much reasonable doubt. You can subjectively argue if they did or didnt, but thats all you really have is subjective hearsay.
I just cant wait til all these "New 9/11" gotcha scandals can stop, they are really just pathetic at this point.
Hillary already admitted it was a failure in leadership. Feel free to watch the congressional hearings with Rand Paul, they are on Youtube.
Much like when the Clintons wasted millions of taxpayers dollars defending Bill's sexcapades, it is Hillary dragging this on and costing more money.
People want, and deserve to know why the reason for the attack was lied about when there is factual evidence they knew differently. If it was a republican you would be foaming at the mouth.
***happens, can't protect everyone, everywhere, all the time, but 3 key unanswered questions remain in this situation. That people who don't just take whatever their television tells them wonder.
1. Why the lies about why the attack took place and blaming a video when they knew differently?
2. Why was it not classified as a embassy in a war-zone so it could have proper security?
3. Were they using the Libyan embassy to arm Syrian rebels and is this why they were attacked?
Sidney Blumenthal was denied working in Hillary's state department. So she privately employed him anyway. Just because criminals know how to bend the rules doesn't mean it isn't unlawful. Like the HRC errors now, professional lawyers will find and flaw or loop and exploit it. Hello Casey Anthony.
Server: Siren
Game: FFXI
Posts: 88
By Siren.Fattynoob 2015-06-10 11:11:58
Speaking of feminism, I wonder why they haven't protested about not having to register for the selective service at 18. Equality and all.
Cause fighting for your freedoms that's a man's job ! When the going gets tough women get a man to do it !
*** please. I know female marines that could kick your *** while you're busy daydreaming about them.
I'm not sure your point other than a possible straw man tactic? I never said women wouldn't serve. I said they aren't forced to register like men are. And if they want equality they should want total equality. Can't pick and choose like bible thumpers and expect to be taken seriously.
[+]
By Ramyrez 2015-06-10 11:13:06
I'm not sure your point other than a possible straw man tactic?
I was taking a specific dig at Fone about his intentionally-adopted misogynist persona for the sake of satire.
Simmer down.
Edit: however, if you want to get specific.
Quote: Can't pick and choose like bible thumpers and expect to be taken seriously.
Tell the MRAs that. They're amazingly good at picking and choosing specific things to *** about while ignoring others.
Hey, it's almost like MRAs are just radical feminists with penesia, and being a radical douchebag about anything is shitty.
And if you're actually concerned about equality, maybe consider that the draft shouldn't be mandatory for anyone rather than demanding women be (potentially) forced to serve as well.
And I bet -- in fact -- you'll find a lot of support among equal rights advocates both male and female to support the notion that the draft itself should go.
[+]
By fonewear 2015-06-10 11:13:36
You kidding feminism is built on a foundation of picking and choosing battles that only effect women !
As a feminist I find this all very very offensive ! And sexist too !
Random Politics & Religion is for topics that aren't thread worthy on their own and do not have their own existing thread.
Rules and Guidelines
Forum Rules and P&R Section Guidelines still apply.
Satire is tolerated.
If your topic covers a story over 6 months old (Watergate, Benghazi, 2012 Election, etc.) post it here.
Discussions on racism, homophobia, transphobia, and the like are allowed, targeted insults based on these will not be tolerated.
Political debates get heated and are meant to be intense, if you take offense to being called or proven wrong, you don't belong here.
If you can't take the heat, get out of the kitchen; if you prove you can't handle the criticism you bring upon yourself in this thread, you may be removed from it. You are responsible for what you post.
Along those lines, heat is fine, but sustained, clearly personal hostility is not okay. The personal attack rules still apply. Attack positions, not posters. Failure to adhere to this will result in your removal from the thread.
This thread is NOT the Flame Core.
These rules are subject to change and modification where and when needed.
Random Politics & Religion may be mained or demained depending on the activity within at a Moderator's discretion.
With that out of the way, let the debates begin!
/bow
|
|