|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
On October 28 2016 12:41 Leporello wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. Not really. I mean, look at the Mark Kirk video above our posts. If I'm supposed to not call that racist, then I may as well be mute.
You know what happens when you start calling everyone racist though? The word loses all meaning and people roll there eyes. EVERYONE on the right gets called a racist by the left and it means that the word has no meaning and suddenly a word that is supposed to be one of the worst things to be is just another thing that when people hear they just turn there mind off.
|
United States44256 Posts
On October 28 2016 13:07 Adreme wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 12:41 Leporello wrote:On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. Not really. I mean, look at the Mark Kirk video above our posts. If I'm supposed to not call that racist, then I may as well be mute. You know what happens when you start calling everyone racist though? The word loses all meaning and people roll there eyes. EVERYONE on the right gets called a racist by the left and it means that the word has no meaning and suddenly a word that is supposed to be one of the worst things to be is just another thing that when people hear they just turn there mind off.
Instead of attacking the left for calling things racist too much couldn't we just ask that the right be a little less racist? Just spitballing here but if you're annoyed by the constant cries of racism more than the actual racism you might be missing the point.
|
On October 28 2016 12:43 Nevuk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. So you don't think that was a racist statement? That's genuinely impressive thinking.
It was an idiotic and rude non-sequitur, but I don't think it was racist, no. There was no implication of a negative characteristic specific to Thais.
That's just me though, I'm not trying to convince you to subscribe to my definition. I reckon the last thing this thread needs is another discussion on what is and isn't racism.
|
Fuck those Bundy jurors. Sending the message armed insurrection and take over of federal land is ok 12 days before the most contentious election in modern history where the likely losers side says they want to revolt if they lose? Backwards hicks... damn that gets my blood pressure up. Oh, and the verdict is just plain embarrassing.
|
Yeah. When it happened I was pretty on board with the "send in the cops and shoot anyone who shoots back" plan, but everyone told me it would be okay, they'd go to jail eventually. This is madness. I can't even imagine the reasoning. Armed insurrection is treasonous. It would be treason if leftists did it, it was treason when right-wingers did it.
|
bah they, (bundy's) were idiots, but they were peaceful and had a pretty good shot at not-guilty from the get go. I doubt that there will be many copy cats, and doubt the bundy's won anything other than their own personal lives.
|
Sweden33719 Posts
On October 28 2016 13:40 Dan HH wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 12:43 Nevuk wrote:On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. So you don't think that was a racist statement? That's genuinely impressive thinking. It was an idiotic and rude non-sequitur, but I don't think it was racist, no. There was no implication of a negative characteristic specific to Thais. That's just me though, I'm not trying to convince you to ascribe to my definition. I reckon the last thing this thread needs is another discussion on what is and isn't racism.
Fwiw, that's what I thought too...
|
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-37795012
A good explanation of the case and what was going on.
It's good to read it and get a clearer explanation of the trial itself. It sounds like the prosecution fucked up hard.
Prosecutors said the defendants, led by brothers Ammon and Ryan Bundy, had kept federal employees from their jobs.
...A bird sanctuary established by President Theodore Roosevelt in 1908 might not have been the most obvious symbol of such "oppression", but in truth it was an easy, empty target for the heavily-armed militia.
Indeed, the lack of resistance may have helped to secure their acquittal. How could the occupiers have impeded US Fish and Wildlife Service workers "by force, intimidation, and threats," if they walked in to the reserve unchallenged?
We'll have to see how the Bundy brothers' case in Nevada goes and the remaining 7 people that still need to go to trial (11 have already taken guilty pleas), but it is absolutely disgusting that these people are walking free over this. A bunch of white people getting away with holding up weapons against the federal government and no one bats a fucking eye.
Not to mention the despicable irony of these rednecks protesting the federal government's use of "their" land when all of this is in relation to Native Americans being the single poorest and most disadvantaged minority in the country that has repeatedly gotten fucked by the federal government throughout history.
|
On October 28 2016 13:32 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 13:07 Adreme wrote:On October 28 2016 12:41 Leporello wrote:On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. Not really. I mean, look at the Mark Kirk video above our posts. If I'm supposed to not call that racist, then I may as well be mute. You know what happens when you start calling everyone racist though? The word loses all meaning and people roll there eyes. EVERYONE on the right gets called a racist by the left and it means that the word has no meaning and suddenly a word that is supposed to be one of the worst things to be is just another thing that when people hear they just turn there mind off. Instead of attacking the left for calling things racist too much couldn't we just ask that the right be a little less racist? Just spitballing here but if you're annoyed by the constant cries of racism more than the actual racism you might be missing the point.
Racist is the strongest word we have for describing a bigoted person. When we use that to describe someone to quickly we cheapen the meaning of the word itself. For example, I am willing to say Donald Trump is probably racist based on his history of of comments and legal actions taken. However when you compare his long history to one comment made by Senator Kirk and give them the label you are cheapening the label for people like him and those of his ilk that truly deserve it. The reason that Donald can be called a racist and middle america just rolls there eyes is because the left throws that term around way to casually and it has the opposite effect of what they intend for it to have.
|
The fact that the left overuses the term racist and sometimes throws the term around too liberally should not impede me from calling out actual racists.
|
The juxtaposition of a conversation about too much use of the word racism and the Oregon terrorists walking, is just too great. Reminder, every Republican's favorite black Sheriff and that other douche have called for armed uprising.
Anyway this is what I said back when it first happened.
On January 03 2016 21:58 GreenHorizons wrote:Show nested quote +On January 03 2016 21:12 Simberto wrote:
That situation is incredibly weird, and i honestly have no idea how a government should reasonably react to it. Do they have hostages? Or are they just basically occupying a federal building with shitloads of guns?
In the second case, the whole situation becomes very delicate. Obviously you need to get them out of there somehow. You probably don't want to start shooting them. And all of them should go to prison for at least a few years, as this is basically an armed robbery. But that only becomes relevant after you have solved the acute problem of getting them out of there. If they are not threatening anyone or keeping anyone hostage, i don't think shooting them would be justified.
GH will point out that if they were black, they had already been shot, which might be true, but isn't solving the problem either, as he would also agree that the police is already shooting too many people, and the solution to "the police is shooting too many black people" isn't "Have them shoot more white people too!"
What i really don't understand is what these guys are hoping to achieve. The best case they could possibly hope for is that they are annoying enough for long enough that they get offered a deal where they leave the building and don't have to go to prison. Which would already be the status quo if they simply hadn't occupied that building. The whole situation seems utterly irrational. So in my opinion, you need some negotiators that are good at talking to crazy people who can somehow convince them to leave that building. And the US should really think about how useful it is to have an armed militia, when the people who tend to join that militia are apparently very crazy. The point is to gain credibility. They already fended off the federal government while pointing guns at them once. This is the natural escalation being that they know they don't have any claim to this land as opposed to listening to a delusional crackpot who told them his family homesteaded the land back in blah blah bullshit. If they don't go to prison than that will be twice they have told the federal government that they will break the law and the government can't do anything about it because they have guns and will use them against government officials who chose to enforce the law. There isn't a single ounce of integrity in any of the "law and order" crowd if they don't call for these terrorists to be arrested and prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If they refuse we can just ask Republicans what enforcement agencies are supposed to do when someone refuses to comply with a lawful order and threatens them if they try to enforce the law... So far it's been ask them politely to stop breaking the law and wait. TIL it's safer to be a white guy engaging in an armed takeover of a government building than it is to be a black guy selling cigarettes on the corner.
|
Well, I hope that I won't be waking up to yet another 40 page circular discussion on the merits of calling people racist. Nighty night.
|
On October 28 2016 14:15 LegalLord wrote:
Well, I hope that I won't be waking up to yet another 40 page circular discussion on the merits of calling people racist. Nighty night.
I'm more concerned about everyone getting their panties wet about WHITE guys not getting convicted.
|
How dare anyone stand up to Leviathan. She is sacred - our God. We must not allow any real dissent to our continued march for progress. Your rage tears are my nectar. :p
|
On October 28 2016 14:00 Liquid`Jinro wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2016 13:40 Dan HH wrote:On October 28 2016 12:43 Nevuk wrote:On October 28 2016 12:37 Adreme wrote:
I would REALLY recommend that democrats avoid using the word racist so much, its so overused that its basically lost any power it may have once had as a label and has become more of an eye roll statement. So you don't think that was a racist statement? That's genuinely impressive thinking. It was an idiotic and rude non-sequitur, but I don't think it was racist, no. There was no implication of a negative characteristic specific to Thais. That's just me though, I'm not trying to convince you to ascribe to my definition. I reckon the last thing this thread needs is another discussion on what is and isn't racism. Fwiw, that's what I thought too...
Same. Its fairly obvious that europeans and americans have different standards for what is racist. Biff the understudy being the exception tho.
|
|
|
The non disclosed informant ran a shooting range and trained people in hand to hand combat during the occupation. Did anyone at some point say that the government informant shouldn't be training the occupiers to fight the government?
|
Oh yay. The "People should only use the word racism when I think it applies" discussion. This is alway productive and not at all a reason why substantive discussions about bigotry can't happen.
|
On October 28 2016 19:42 Plansix wrote:
Oh yay. The "People should only use the word racism when I think it applies" discussion. This is alway productive and not at all a reason why substantive discussions about bigotry can't happen.
They can use it whenever they want but they should bare the consequences of looking like an idiot if they abuse the term.
|
Can someone post what the Kirk dude said? I can't understand the video. Something something George Washington.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
