User registration set back to admin approval because of spam. Email with your user name to be approved.

Current events

16061636566141

Comments

  • I just think they've gotten too much attention that's all. Now they all have this sense of entitlement. While our roads, hospitals, internet and schools are classified as wasted money and families should come first becasue that's where the votes are.

    I mean have you listened to Abbott piss all over the Building the Education Revolution, with a +90% success and satisfaction rating (by an independent commission). Meanwhile he along with many others that buy his brand bullshit said it was a waste of money.
  • Again, I've been followed and asked to empty my pockets in a store by clerks. Everything else is fine but it's ones like those that always bug me when these topics come up.
  • I can't respect any publication that abuses capitalization that way.
  • I blame Capitalism.
  • Squirrel said:

    Again, I've been followed and asked to empty my pockets in a store by clerks. Everything else is fine but it's ones like those that always bug me when these topics come up.

    So instead of being empathetic to the fact that a race of people is subjected to the same unjustified treatment you experienced you use your own story as an indication that their feelings are invalid? Or are you providing an anecdote in an attempt to contradict what black people in particular feel is treatment brought on by their race?
  • I think it is also increasingly fair to say, "Poor is the new black."
  • Hatred of children is never a bad thing.
  • Also, I finally read that brief piece on race. It's as stupid as Derbyshire's post was, just without the layer of mindless hatred.
  • edited April 2012
    I'm saying that those particular incidents are not limited by race, or at least not "black". Latino children face that same stigma. Is it a factor? Yes. She asks "have you ever" in an attempt to make the reader feel guilty. On those ones, I can answer yes and then don't. I can't answer yes to the other ones personally but I have very close family who can, so I agree with her there.

    I get it, the vast majority of people reading that article do not have inner city childhoods so they aren't exposed to that but, like Jon mentioned, a noticeable chunk of race related discussions lately feel more like class related to me. Now that is a completely different conversation than the one she poses.

    I'm not saying the article is invalid I'm just saying that when bullet points similar to those come up my ADD mind wanders away and it's hard for me to come back.
  • I don't think she's trying to make people feel guilty (I certainly didn't feel any guilt reading it). I believe she's trying to say that race does matter to black people and why.
  • Relevant to the idea that poor is the "new black." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poor_People's_Campaign

  • edited April 2012
    I do feel bad for her friend to have been subjected to that article.
  • Ha. So does this mean that my collection of "Poor People's Pub" T-shirts is gonna be racist now?
  • I do feel bad for her friend to have been subjected to that article.

    Whyzat?
  • http://partialobjects.com/2011/03/all-the-news-thats-fit-to-compartmentalize/

    Been on a jag of reading blogs like the above. I despair for our society.
  • While not everyone is as goddamn dumb as John Derbyshire, there are plenty of people around who don't get "why black people won't stop talking about race." There are people for whom that article is probably a revelation, and it has to do with race, at least partly. When people talk about privilege, they are talking about the people for whom the questions in that article are purely hypothetical.
  • edited April 2012
    Tennessee House Passes Bill To Allow Criminal Prosecution For Harming Embryos:

    http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/04/20/468484/tennessee-criminal-prosecution-harming-embryos/

    I thought Republicans were trying to limit the number of frivolous lawsuits against doctors. I mean, that's why they made it legal for doctors to lie to women about the state of their fetus, right? And these are embryos.
  • It just seems mean. I mean, essentially what she did was put all that up in a facebook comment right?
  • While not everyone is as goddamn dumb as John Derbyshire, there are plenty of people around who don't get "why black people won't stop talking about race." There are people for whom that article is probably a revelation, and it has to do with race, at least partly. When people talk about privilege, they are talking about the people for whom the questions in that article are purely hypothetical.

    I've seen interviews with both Morgan Freeman and Bill Cosby in which they say the only way to end racism in America is to stop talking about race. I'm not sure it's really a matter of "dumb" or "not dumb." Surely there is room for radically different approaches to problems that are chaotic in nature because there are simply too many variables? This is the same (morality aside, I'm talking simple math) as the trickle-down vs. trickle-up economic argument. There are appropriate circumstances for both models. Arguing that one or the other is an "incorrect" model is silly.
  • edited April 2012
    Jason said:

    I've seen interviews with both Morgan Freeman and Bill Cosby in which they say the only way to end racism in America is to stop talking about race.

    I get the point they're making (I think I've seen the interviews you mean), but where does that leave Rodney King or Trayvon Martin, or their counterparts which are far more frequent than the media would have you believe? They're right that we must look past the differences in culture and race that divide us and look to what unite us instead. But remaining silent in the face of injustice that is wholly ignored does something worse than prevent progress: it presents the illusion of progress.
    Jason said:

    I'm not sure it's really a matter of "dumb" or "not dumb."

    Well, Derbyshire was dumb. But I think there are many Americans who are ignorant or lack perspective to see societal problems given that things look so hunkydory from the upper-middle class suburb.
    Jason said:

    Surely there is room for radically different approaches to problems that are chaotic in nature because there are simply too many variables?

    I'm willing to accept that. I don't think that Derbyshire or to a lesser degree, people who "don't get the big deal about race" have an approach at all. My issue is more with them than with Cosby or Freeman, people who have the same aim but different opinions on how to proceed.
  • edited April 2012
    The problem is that race does matter to a lot of people, oftentimes completely unconsciously and without malice*. Sometimes, it doesn't hurt anyone, like when picking a place to live or picking people with whom you play video games. Sometimes, it does hurt people, like when deciding when someone should get a job or not, or when someone should get convicted or not, or when trying to tell if someone walking through your neighborhood is a threat.

    *Some racism is just straight up personally prejudiced bigotry, which I feel is pretty rare these days (it's at least socially unacceptable). Most racism is just failing to recognize unconscious, non-malicious assumptions about people of a different race, which is why a lot of people feel it's important to talk about race.

    Duke just came out with a study about conviction rates related to racial composition of a jury: Is justice blind?

    Here's the gist:
    image
  • An interesting piece on reproductive rights in science fiction:
    http://hereandnow.wbur.org/2012/04/24/reproduction-science-fiction
  • I am extremely amused by the notion that someone is writing a serious, thoughtful piece about reproductive rights in science fiction and the first film on their list is "Hell Comes To Frogtown".
  • Yeah, that's pretty dumb.
  • The more I read about John Edwards, the more I am reminded of the book, The Psychopath Test.
  • I don't know what would be worse: if everyone in the press in 2004 had agreed to not talk about it, or if they genuinely did not know.
  • I thought it was 2008.
  • Fun times with Mitt Romney.

  • http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2012/04/25/470967/gop-school-lunch-cuts/?mobile=wp

    Joel is right, one of 'those' articles in the current events thread.
  • ^^My working theory at the moment is that Romney was sent back from the future to kill Sarah Connor, but is so comically inept at it that he's been made the post-apocalypse's number one comedy.
  • Hey wow; I already posted exactly that. (Although you're right that it really sucks.)

    It's one of those things, like "consumer goods are made in China" or "restaurant servers are paid less than minimum wage", where the attitude seems to be "oh well you want these lower prices and this is what it takes to do that!" and I'm like "you know, nobody ever actually asked me if I wanted to make that choice".
  • It's not about the comsumers like yourself, it's about the bottom line. There's only the illusion of choice, captialism at it's finest.
  • That's something I can get behind.

    HE-YOOOOOOOOO
  • That's not even remotely a new sentiment...
  • Dang, he's some big brassy balls.
  • " The majority would rather douse their dicks with lighter fluid, strike a match, and dance around singing “Disco Inferno” than pay one more cent in taxes to Uncle Sugar. "

    So in other words what he's saying is not "tax me" but rather "tax all those other rich people who aren't willing to be taxed because they lack sufficient committment to the greater good of society".

    "The Koch brothers are right-wing creepazoids, but they’re giving right-wing creepazoids. Here’s an example: 68 million fine American dollars to Deerfield Academy."

    Ah-ha. So there's your message: Don't bother being charitable because only super-smart people like Trent Lott and Nancy Pelosi and John Edwards know what needs spending money on. If you go around giving money privately you'll just give it to local women's shelters or teacher's-assistance organizations, and not things we need like repeated studies to determine whether clearing brush in the mountains around Santa Cruz would have a negative environmental impact, or ensuring that anyone who wants to sell rabbits for use as pets is properly licensed to do so, or ensuring that former police commissioners who live in suburban Arizona get paid like they lived in downtown San Francisco.
  • You're not that dumb, RB.

    You work on stuff that goes into outer space - I'm pretty sure you can figure out what he's actually saying.
  • edited April 2012

    " The majority would rather douse their dicks with lighter fluid, strike a match, and dance around singing “Disco Inferno” than pay one more cent in taxes to Uncle Sugar. "

    So in other words what he's saying is not "tax me" but rather "tax all those other rich people who aren't willing to be taxed because they lack sufficient committment to the greater good of society".

    No, he's saying "Tax me as well as all those other rich people who aren't willing to be taxed because they lack sufficient committment to the greater good of society".

    "The Koch brothers are right-wing creepazoids, but they’re giving right-wing creepazoids. Here’s an example: 68 million fine American dollars to Deerfield Academy."

    Ah-ha. So there's your message: Don't bother being charitable because only super-smart people like Trent Lott and Nancy Pelosi and John Edwards know what needs spending money on. If you go around giving money privately you'll just give it to local women's shelters or teacher's-assistance organizations, and not things we need like repeated studies to determine whether clearing brush in the mountains around Santa Cruz would have a negative environmental impact, or ensuring that anyone who wants to sell rabbits for use as pets is properly licensed to do so, or ensuring that former police commissioners who live in suburban Arizona get paid like they lived in downtown San Francisco.

    Again, no. The message isn't "don't give to charity" - it's that charity alone is simply inadequate to do what needs to be done. Nonetheless, it is important to note that charities are not all equal - some are most definitely better than others.
  • edited April 2012
    But RB loves being free market... The invisible hand always knows best!
  • Yeah, you're being overly dense there.
  • edited April 2012
    I think the idea is that the super rich will only voluntarily donate to things that they directly approve, not things they oppose, like providing reproductive services for women.
  • "I'm pretty sure you can figure out what he's actually saying."

    I quoted what he was actually saying. What he's actually saying is that when people say "write a check" he thinks that isn't good enough because there are still some people who don't donate to charity--er, excuse me, don't donate to proper charities--and that's Just Not Right.

    And it's not necessarily a bad thing to suggest that donations shouldn't go to causes you disapprove of, and if you think that religious organizations shouldn't get tax breaks then you agree.
  • lackofcheese already pointed out everything I might have said in response.
  • Taxes=charity donations?

    Thanks RB, I learned a lot today.
Sign In or Register to comment.