zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

Of course the person in question was racist. Do you think either the black or asian policemen didn’t already know that? Of course not. The act itself of refusing assistance was an asshole move. Therefore I did state it accurately.

Where did anyone say anything about “refusing assistance”? That’s not in the article.

And my point was, if you acknowledge the real problem—saying RACISTS are everywhere, not assholes are everywhere—then it looks different. It’s less of a cover up to put it that way. Because after a while you eventually have to recognize, the racists have no excuse and ought to change…being racist is on them. Recognizing that means we move away from the position of being white while telling minorities the “proper” way to handle racism when that’s simple arrogance…we don’t encounter racism like that. So who are we to tell anyone how to handle it.

..

In both cases the racists refused the assistance of the responding minority officer. Refusing their assistance is an asshole move. Is it because you don’t see the phrase “refusing assistance” in the article? Really? Wow.

And to top it off you have forgotten what the article asked the reader at the end-

“My question to you is this: What do I say in moments like this? They happen all the time. What can you possibly say, right now, while the sting of ugly prejudice is still burning, to calm a young officer down? Words must be spoken, and the situation must be dealt with, but what to say? What can a middle aged white guy say to a twenty-five year old Asian man about prejudice and the need to weather it all in the interests of serving and protecting our diverse community?
What would you say?”

So I answered the question asked of me. Buck up assholes are everywhere.

This became an epidemic here years ago and hasn’t slowed down. It is especially bad along the interstates where the chance of finding large sums of cash is greater. You cannot carry cash in any amount without risking it being stolen by the police. The cases are rare that go to court and doing so costs more than most people have had stolen. It is good to see this get attention even by a comedy show.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by bnw.

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

I’d say buck up theres assholes everywhere.

Which means you;re white.

No one has or ever will do that to you.

So how relevant, really, are OUR thoughts on this? The truth is, we don’t know. We have no idea. We might as well be discussing what childbirth feels like.

.

Do it to me racially probably not outside of prison. But I have endured prejudice based upon religion. As I said assholes are everywhere.

They know your religion only if you profess it or mention it. I have encountered prejudice too in various ways (as has everyone) but being of the majority we can walk away from it if we want.

It’s not like all members of your religious affiliation are identifiable by skin color plus there’s a long, deep, wide history of actively preventing you from have rights as an american based solely on that color.

It’s completely arrogant of us to act like we know what that’s like.

The ramifications of what you say are more clear if you stated the truth instead of letting it slip by. That is, what if you had said, they should get over it because there are racists everywhere. See at a certain point, if you state it more accurately that way, it begs the question—why don’t the racists get over it.

..

Of course the person in question was racist. Do you think either the black or asian policemen didn’t already know that? Of course not. The act itself of refusing assistance was an asshole move. Therefore I did state it accurately.

TSRF wrote:

Obviously a proponent of tough love, bnw. That may work in a combat situation, but I don’t think it is healthy for a long term fix. Stiff upper lip results in stress, high blood pressure and death.

If I was that police supervisor, I’d be more concerned with the reaction of his seasoned vet than how I had to deal with the new kid.

Not sure where these cops are, big city or little town. Either case, I think the real solution is community outreach. The more non-cop-like things they can do with the general public, the better.

In the immediate aftermath of Sandy Hook, several volunteers showed up with Comfort Dogs. These were stationed at every school in town. If kids were feeling especially sad, they could go out of their class and give a Comfort Dog a hug. My daughter, especially said it was a big help and she talked at length to the volunteers minding the dogs.

Maybe cops should be the ones with Comfort Dogs. Small steps, but something has to be done to break down the “us” vs. “them” walls.

Kindness is an answer. Love is an answer. Respect is an answer. Love and respect are earned, kindness is a deliberate state of mind that can open the door to both.

Or buck up.

I’d say buck up theres assholes everywhere.

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

The decider’s justification for invading Iraq.

Were you saying all that at the time? Not challenging you, just curious.

I will say this. This board, or its original version, grew out of an interest by many in getting beyond mainstream media stuff on the build up to the war. We pretty much pieced together the fact that on every single level, there was no justification for it. It was a very involved, multi-faceted discussion.

Yes I was against not because I had proof but because it didn’t pass the smell test. It was about personal revenge on dubya’s part as well as an oil grab.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

Oh, and you also have to fund those public sector efforts, if you want government to stop the private sector from screwing over the people and corrupting society. You’d have to be in favor of much, much higher tax rates, especially on the rich for that — and, if I am not mistaken, you called our incredibly low taxes, “egregious beyond belief.”

I never addressed income tax rates. I said taxes on interest earned and on stock gains is egregious since the money was already taxed as income and the bank lends it out at a much higher rate than interest rate received, plus in my case the government gets 28% of all stock profit while I take all the risk.

More government? How has that worked? Ask Madoff’s victims. The SEC was practically a co-conspirator in that fraud. How about the FBI having known about arabic speaking pilots in training not at all interested in learning to land passenger jets during the run up to 9/11? So many more but you get the idea.

The money wasn’t already taxed. It’s a new profit for you. And why are you paying 28% for capital gains when the top rate is 20%?

So what if it is a new profit. I took all the risk with my money that I had already paid taxes on. Collectibles and small business stocks is 28%.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by bnw.

Billy_T wrote:

With that out of the way, we further prevent the concentration of political power through the use of lottery, and no permanent power structure. We do our civil duty, our two or four years, and then we go home. Someone else replaces us. We rotate out. Locally, regionally, nationally. In the workplace, we’d do the same, though for shorter time periods. No permanent power structure there, either.

I’ve always supported term limits. It’s what the founding fathers wanted with citizen legislators serving a term or two then returning to their communities. Yet with congress operating on seniority for most everything they want to stay to gain more power. They then lose touch with their constituents yet are re-elected over and over all the while getting chummy with the lobbyists who will be their employer when they leave congress. Same crap with high ranking military officers and the defense industry lobbyists.

Make term limits mandatory. Make it illegal to work as a lobbyist for at least 7 years after leaving office. I would make that for congress, military and cabinet members.

It was a False Flag.

zn wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

. He’s perhaps the best-read, most erudite reader of the Bard alive today.

Take my word for this.

No.

Nothing wrong with Bloom, I like Bloom. But he’s not the best Shakespeare scholar or however you want to put that.

.

Shakespeare scholar? Roddenberry scholar? Both are ridiculous.

Billy_T wrote:

bnw wrote:

Billy_T wrote:

Again the USA is a republic.

Again, the USA is a democratic republic. And, as mentioned, it’s anything we want it to be. It’s up to us.

Why do you insist on removing the “democratic” part? Are you against democracy?

The USA is a republic. If you need to put a qualifier in front then that would be a representative or constitutional republic.

Because you say so? That’s not how it works, bnw.

We obviously don’t see eye to eye on this one, either — and that list of disagreements seems to stretch to the furthest horizons . . . :>) and that’s fine. To each their own, etc. etc. But from my readings, from my experiences and observations, it’s a democratic republic. At least it’s supposed to be. And if we want to make it far more democratic, we can — including the economy. That’s within our power as a people. It’s up to us.

Again, do you have a problem with democracy? Is that why you’re so insistent on leaving it out? And can you describe your position regarding democracy?

The USA is not a democracy. Never has been either. Why do you insist on calling it something it never was? The USA is a representative republic within a constitutional framework thus it is also a constitutional republic.

zn wrote:

bnw wrote:

What rush?

They are uniforms worn exclusively for Thursday Night Football.

Last year’s Rams color rush uni was the all-mustard uni:

I remember. The pic in the first post looks like the Rams old uniform hence the what rush?

• This reply was modified 8 years, 4 months ago by bnw.

wv wrote:

bnw wrote:

Again the USA is a republic.

————
Definitions and labels aside, do you think the mega-corporations
and wealthiest-one-percenters have too much influence
over how laws are written and how policies are created and implemented?

w
v

I don’t agree with corporate personhood. You can blame monied interests like the 1% and mega-corporations but that isn’t the problem. The too easily bought politicians are the problem.

Billy_T wrote:

We’re a democratic republic, to distinguish us from other forms.

From Wiki:

Montesquieu included in his work “The Spirit of the Laws” both democracies, where all the people have a share in rule, and aristocracies or oligarchies, where only some of the people rule, as republican forms of government.[6]

At least in theory. In practice, we’ve become an oligarchy, with a capitalist aristocracy running the show.

Beyond all of that, America is what we make it. It’s never been anything set in stone. It’s never remained “as the founders wanted it.” If that were so, we’d still have a slaveocracy, and only white men with property could vote.

If we want it to be a full and direct democracy, we have the ability to make that happen, as a people, and there is nothing to prevent that. If we want to democratize the economy, we can do that too. It’s up to us.

Again the USA is a republic.