|
XyloJW posted:It can't be easy to convince someone to go out there and say "As a [x], we are all lesser. We suck. Please oppress us more, we really deserve it." You have to raise them steeped in that poo poo straight from birth. If the GOP knows what's good for it, they've got a farm somewhere where they're raising the next generation of pundits. .....or you can just tell them they can make good money telling white people what they want to hear. Remember, these people are paid handsomely to debase themselves for white peoples pleasure. They don't have to believe what they're telling you. A hooker doesn't have to mean it when she tells you "You're the best", "Oh god, its SOOOO big!" and "Don't worry, you still held out longer than anyone else."
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:Jones isn't the only one excited about a possible race war, Drudge loves that stuff. I heard this episode! He had on a guy from the old Black Panther Party who said that anyone who didn't think Obama was a CIA plant was engaging in mental masturbation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:11
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:I think Hannity may in fact be the one true believer. None of them are true believers, otherwise they would've been pushed off the air at some point in the past twenty years as the right has evolved. They're just entertainers that don't give a gently caress about what effects their content has on their listeners. At least Morton Downey Jr. took it all over the top to a point where it was kind of hard to believe he was for real, but the AM cabal doesn't bother with that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:18
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure a public defender from not a not poor background is still leagues away from a CEO worth billions. The problem here isn't professionals making $100,000 to $500,000 a year. The problem is CEOs that make dozens or hundreds of millions a year running companies making dozens or hundreds of billions a year that are posting record profits while decimating their labor force. A person who inherits a business empire worth $5,000,000,000 wasn't born on home plate. He was born owning the drat park and gets to decide who is allowed to even play. ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 00:29 on Jul 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:24
|
|
|
Sir Tonk posted:None of them are true believers, otherwise they would've been pushed off the air at some point in the past twenty years as the right has evolved. They're just entertainers that don't give a gently caress about what effects their content has on their listeners. At least Morton Downey Jr. took it all over the top to a point where it was kind of hard to believe he was for real, but the AM cabal doesn't bother with that. Hannity is a true believer in that he truly hates liberals and is for anything that spites them.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
ToxicSlurpee posted:I'm pretty sure a public defender from not a not poor background is still leagues away from a CEO worth billions. The problem here isn't professionals making $100,000 to $500,000 a year. The problem is CEOs that make dozens or hundreds of millions a year running companies making dozens or hundreds of billions a year that are posting record profits while decimating their labor force. He is born playing baseball stadium tycoon, and also he owns the computer and the house the computer is in and also the planet he is on. I don't think you can really zoom out far enough to properly encapsulate how far removed from normal life people that rich are. Wait, yes you can: 
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
pentyne posted:"particularly burly 5th grader" Mods, namechange please. also how many laptops and ipads has rush given away so far this year?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 02:18
|
|
|
BiggerBoat posted:I never get why most of these people fail to understand how wealth is largely a generational issue. The same way that wealth perpetuates itself in families, so does poverty. Good news, though: thanks to pension looting, rising tuition and "spending down" to qualify for elder care benefits, more and more children of the middle class are leaving it than ever before! We've finally achieved income mobility in the United States.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 02:33
|
|
|
Miltank posted:-George Zimmerman Well luckily he isn't a murderer, according to recent events.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 04:29
|
|
|
IrvingWashington posted:Well luckily he isn't a murderer, according to recent events. Neither was O.J. I knew I shouldn't have equated the two prematurely, I think this verdict might have been my fault 
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 04:53
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCtOfY_DKkw I'm trying to write something funny about how you couldn't possibly be old enough to be to blame for endemic racism but I am a) a bad poster and b) too loving defeated right now. I'll turn it all into something useful tomorrow, but today feels like 2003 all over again. Nice to see CNN giving Robert Zimmerman Jr. some airtime: "I want to know what makes people angry enough to attack someone the way that Trayvon Martin did."
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 05:13
|
|
|
BONGHITZ posted:also how many laptops and ipads has rush given away so far this year? One, it keeps getting sent back to him when the winner can't figure out how to use it. IrvingWashington posted:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PCtOfY_DKkw The funniest thing that could be written is how irony is dead. Fla. mom gets 20 years for firing warning shots Should have killed him, or been white I guess is the lesson.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:The funniest thing that could be written is how irony is dead. Literally the reason that the judge denied her defense attorney the ability to defend her actions with "Stand Your Ground" is that she went to the garage to leave, realized she didn't have the keys, and went back inside to get them. I guess she should have just taken off running, you know, and hoped that the guy wouldn't chase her.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 06:03
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:Literally the reason that the judge denied her defense attorney the ability to defend her actions with "Stand Your Ground" is that she went to the garage to leave, realized she didn't have the keys, and went back inside to get them. So self defense is only valid if you run towards what you're supposed to be afraid of.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 06:09
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:Literally the reason that the judge denied her defense attorney the ability to defend her actions with "Stand Your Ground" is that she went to the garage to leave, realized she didn't have the keys, and went back inside to get them. This case gets a bit muddled. The problem is that she didn't have the needed intent for self-defense. There is a long line of cases where persons who accidentally fire their gun in a self-defense case gt into trouble. I remember reading this case and there was a lot more too it than gets reported in the media, but it was a long time ago. It was legally correct. The problem is that the law sucks and no one has fixed it because no one gets hot an bothered about accidentally killing someone in a self-defense situation as the people who want to expand these laws think they are Rambo and will never gently caress up. Re: Martin, i posted this in the lawyers thread The problem was that it wasn't properly reviewed at the beginning. That was the major issue. However, I can see where reasonable doubt comes from. Remember that if the jury paid attention to the instructions, they only had to find some reasonable doubt as to murder. If they thought there is some possibility that he was acting in self-defense, they had to acquit. Apparently, FL's manslaughter laws are not as broad as California's, which would have caught him in an imperfect self-defense theory. Admittedly, many juries ignore reasonable doubt, but I have issues criticizing a jury in a close case like this. I think Zimmerman wanted to kill a black guy, buy I'm not 100% that that is beyond a reasonable doubt, maybe. Remember this is supposed to be a very high standard to reach. I think based on the jury's question, they were begging for something to convict him of but couldn't because of poo poo laws. This is unlike Casey Anthony, where an arrogant prosecutor decline the lessers. Here they asked for them-- problem is that FL law sucks. The other problem is that the people who were on Zimmerman's side will take this as vindication and will use this as a justification. The other bad part about the media beat the drumbeats of whatever when someone they know is guilty to hang them is that they never focus on how little doubt is needed to acquit -- this means that when there is an acquittal, they treat it as a vindication. All this means is that the jurors had some nagging doubt in their mind -- even if they thought Zimmerman was a horrible, horrible person who wanted to kill Trayvon, if there was some "well maybe" they were instructed to acquit. Now if juries gave that same benefit to poor black defendants as they did Zimmerman, the world would be a better place, but the goal shouldn't be to move the system backwards just to make it equal -- it should be moved forward. nm fucked around with this message at 06:20 on Jul 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 06:17
|
|
|
nm posted:*snip* And your bit about vindication is frankly what terrifies me. I'm actually not surprised at the verdict, as I'm aware of the height of the bar for reasonable doubt. I'm just sick to my stomach at the thought of how many racist shitheads are going to figure this is all the excuse they need to cowboy up and perforate some "gangstas" at the slightest provocation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 08:55
|
|
|
CarterUSM posted:Mea culpa. I realize I was oversimplifying. It still strikes me as a gigantic cry for legislative reconciliation of intent and actuality when you have someone get sentenced for twenty years for trying to NOT hit someone that was threatening to kill them, and an acquittal for someone who initiated a confrontation that wound up going lethal force. This is literally, to the letter, what happened to trayvon, so I guess you're afraid of this causing itself. It's already happening, but yeah, I suppose it might make it happen more. Hopefully some of these innocent people stand their ground and aren't murdered.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 11:11
|
|
|
nm posted:Admittedly, many juries ignore reasonable doubt, but I have issues criticizing a jury in a close case like this. I think Zimmerman wanted to kill a black guy, buy I'm not 100% that that is beyond a reasonable doubt, maybe. Remember this is supposed to be a very high standard to reach. I think based on the jury's question, they were begging for something to convict him of but couldn't because of poo poo laws. I don't know if Zimmerman wanted to kill a black guy, or if Martin actually did throw the first punch and Zimmerman legitimately panicked or whatever. Only Zimmerman will ever really know any of that. What I do know though is that it is entirely down to the decisions made and the actions taken by George Zimmerman that a 17 year old black kid ended up dead. It is, in every sense, his fault, and if Florida law doesn't provide for a way to recognize that, it's poo poo. The decision to get out of that car with that gun and walk towards Martin is what should result in prison time. That said, I wouldn't be able to sentence anyone to prison in the US no matter what they've done cus your system is so terrible. Orange Devil fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Jul 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 14:08
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:I don't know if Zimmerman wanted to kill a black guy, or if Martin actually did throw the first punch and Zimmerman legitimately panicked or whatever. Only Zimmerman will ever really know any of that. What I do know though is that it is entirely down to decisions made and the actions taken by George Zimmerman that a 17 year old black kid ended up dead. It is, in every sense, his fault, and if Florida law doesn't provide for a way to recognize that, it's poo poo. Take it to the Zimmerman thread, people. You can argue in circles all you want there until the thread gets gassed for being loving horrible. Don't bring that into this good thread. On a right-wing media note, how long till Fox News hires Zimmerman as a legal-affairs commentator?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 14:11
|
|
|
PostNouveau posted:On a right-wing media note, how long till Fox News hires Zimmerman as a legal-affairs commentator? More likely his lawyer?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
Orange Devil posted:More likely his lawyer? Wasn't he already on CNN?
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 14:43
|
|
|
Zeroisanumber posted:Wasn't he already on CNN? Given the post-victory press conference Zimmerman's lawyers made I expect to see them all over right wing programs talking about the case and how it was racist that Zimmerman was charged to begin with and blah blah blah. The only thing worse then Zimmerman walking scott free is the smug reactions of his defenders and their cheer-leading of "justice being done" and their characterization of Trayvon as a thug being legitimized.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
RetroHelix posted:Holy poo poo, a woman wrote that. I was picturing some balding middle-aged overweight buffoon. Nope! I'll never understand how some women can internalize misogyny so much. XyloJW posted:Suzanne Vekner is also Phyllis Schlafly's niece. I'm sure it's no coincidence. God drat, between this and her nutbag son Andy, that family just keeps pumping out horrific children. Nucleic Acids fucked around with this message at 23:35 on Jul 14, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2013 23:31
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I'll never understand how some women can internalize misogyny so much. Well if their environment day in day out is nothing but rank misogyny it's not too much of a stretch for it to rub off. Same thing with black self-hatred.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 00:59
|
|
|
I plan on avoiding all conservative websites and talk radio for at least one full week. I may not even read this thread during that time. Hannity was bad enough this past week, I can't imagine the amount of smug that he's gonna display now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 01:27
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I'll never understand how some women can internalize misogyny so much. It's a way to cope, it's nothing new. There were plenty of women who were against giving women the right to vote.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 01:49
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:It's a way to cope, it's nothing new. There were plenty of women who were against giving women the right to vote. comes along bort posted:Well if their environment day in day out is nothing but rank misogyny it's not too much of a stretch for it to rub off. Same thing with black self-hatred. I can understand that, it just amazes me how virulent it can be. I suppose it's just hard for me to understand what it must be like to live in that kind of environment and be so subjected to that kind of hate that you take it upon yourself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
Warchicken posted:I want them to claim its no big deal and they can last x amount of minutes or admit it is torture and then get humiliated because they literally don't last three seconds. Christopher Hitchens was a loving rear end in a top hat, but I respect the fact that he thought waterboarding wasn't torture and volunteered for it to prove it. They gave him these things to hold so he could drop them as a signal to stop, and I don't think he held on to them for even a second. They uncovered his face and sat him up, and he looked like he'd just watched his parents get hit by a bus. Total trauma. He immediately declared it torture and stopped saying it wasn't.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 02:27
|
|
|
Having integrity is hard. Hitchens is an eternal rear end in a top hat; however, he had enough integrity to actually try getting waterboarded.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 02:47
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:It's a way to cope, it's nothing new. There were plenty of women who were against giving women the right to vote. I'd go even further and make it a whole month. It would be some good detox for your mental health.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 02:55
|
|
|
Nice Davis posted:If Hannity was the one true believer he would have gotten himself waterboarded as he promised, come up spluttering and gasping with tears in his eyes, and still maintained that it's not torture. He's just a loving smug shill. Hannity is really one of the few right wing commentators that's dumb and mean enough to believe it all. Over the years his views continually align with conservative Republican party rhetoric. They said it wasn't torture, he believes it isn't torture. Most likely someone just told him not to go through with it, and/or he's just a coward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 03:06
|
|
|
Pope Guilty posted:Christopher Hitchens was a loving rear end in a top hat, but I respect the fact that he thought waterboarding wasn't torture and volunteered for it to prove it. They gave him these things to hold so he could drop them as a signal to stop, and I don't think he held on to them for even a second. They uncovered his face and sat him up, and he looked like he'd just watched his parents get hit by a bus. Total trauma. He immediately declared it torture and stopped saying it wasn't. Gitmo force feeding is the new waterboarding. Recently, Yasiin Bey (Mos Def) underwent the procedure used to feed hunger strikers in Guantanamo. The resulting video is phenomenally uncomfortable to watch. Not surprisingly, the fine folks at National Review disagree with Bey's characterization of force feeding as torture. What is surprising, however, is that one of their columnists actually had the stones to try it out himself. He said it was unpleasant, but overall did not seem to rise anywhere close to the level of torture. I have to give credit to that columnist for stepping up where Hannity failed and actually backing up his words with actions. Yeah loving right. Of course the NRO folks would never actually go do something like this themselves. Instead they just write shitbird articles containing choice quotes such as: quote:It is distinctly uncomfortable to watch, and before I go on to criticize Bey for his little agitprop, I should say that I would not want to be force-fed. But not because it’s torture — because it looks unpleasant, and because you can’t pipe in prime-grade chateaubriand. The author is an "editorial intern". Do you think he gained his familiarity with chateaubriand from the lavish intern wages NRO is almost certainly not paying him, or is it more likely that he knows about it from living a life of comfortable privilege he quote:The detainees have multiple halal meal options, and even the hunger strikers can choose their flavor of Ensure, the liquid nutritional supplement they are fed. I'm sure the choice between strawberry and vanilla matters a ton when it's being piped through your nose directly into your esophagus and totally bypassing your loving taste buds. quote:And not to be nonchalant about the whole thing, but just think: These prisoners could be one of their many comrades who ended up on the business end of a Hellfire missile. Honestly, this seems like the better deal to me. Whew! Thank goodness you aren't meaning to be nonchalant. Otherwise I'd think you're a loving callous prick.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 03:07
|
|
|
Right wing pseudo-intellectualism of the National Review variety takes the cake as far as inducing blinding, incoherent rage in anyone who isn't a shitbag, IMO. At least people like Rush claim to base their views on "common sense", and thus they don't need stuff like "proof". These people just lie through their teeth with a big smuggo grin and vomit the most asinine, childish, pedantic quips and side comments I've ever seen in my life. example: quote:It is distinctly uncomfortable to watch, and before I go on to criticize Bey for his little agitprop, I should say that I would not want to be force-fed. But not because it’s torture — because it looks unpleasant, and because you can’t pipe in prime-grade chateaubriand. Agitprop? Chateaubriand? I'll bet the author doesn't even know what the gently caress those words mean. Jesus loving christ saying that torture is torture is not loving agitprop you're not some suave loving rebel fighting who's so much smarter and wittier than the commie establishemnt aughghghhghhh my head hurts icantfindaname fucked around with this message at 03:54 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 03:49
|
|
|
Nice Davis posted:Gitmo force feeding is the new waterboarding. Recently, Yasiin Bey (Mos Def) underwent the procedure used to feed hunger strikers in Guantanamo. The resulting video is phenomenally uncomfortable to watch. Not to mention the whole right wing media trying paint the Guantanamo Bay prisoners as hardened terrorists deserving of special torture when in a reality a majority of them got put there due to the US cash bounty for Taliban system. Basically the US offered $25,000 reward for turning in senior Taliban in a country with $300 per capita, with predictable results. Lots of people also used the reward system to resolve personal feuds. Here's a good book on the subject from a Afgan american who did pro-bono defense work: http://www.amazon.com/My-Guantanamo-Diary-Detainees-Stories/dp/B003YDXDPE
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 04:10
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I can understand that, it just amazes me how virulent it can be. I suppose it's just hard for me to understand what it must be like to live in that kind of environment and be so subjected to that kind of hate that you take it upon yourself. A lot of it has to do with human psychology, actually. You're most comfortable in familiar environments, right? People yearn for normalcy and consistency. When the surroundings are familiar you know what things to avoid, what things are good, and how to deal with the bad or dangerous things. The thing is, you KNOW. Unfamiliar things and situations are uncomfortable because you aren't sure what is dangerous and what isn't. Humans are pretty hard wired to, at the very least, be wary of unfamiliar things. We're also creatures of habit. We do things the same way over and over again because, well, that's what's familiar. If you know a thing works you keep doing it. Society kind of works the same way, which is part of why it isn't easy to change poo poo. A neighborhood you lived in for twenty years is a safe, comfortable place. You know it and you know it well. You know what places to avoid, what places are safe, and so forth. You can thrive in the surroundings. They're familiar. People use slang you know, they speak the same language as you, the local customs are known to you. A neighborhood 2,000 miles away that you've never been to will make you, at the very least, cautious. You don't know it. You need to be careful about exploring because, for all you know, the neighborhood could be a retirement community full of old people that do nothing but drink beer and play bridge or it could be a front for some kind of horrendously violent organized crime ring that will murder the poo poo out of you for taking a wrong turn. If you've never been there before you just don't know. One of the big reasons even some women were against giving women the right to vote was because women not voting was just the way it was. It was a new thing that some people found terrifying just because it was different than the status quo. While there are those that look at a good change and go "this change is good, we should do this change" there are those that are going to be openly hostile to all change, all the time, merely because it's change. It upsets the status quo. It alters society. Changes always have ramifications, which may or may not always be good and there are people so utterly terrified of the idea of a change going wrong that they resist all changes, forever, all the time. ToxicSlurpee fucked around with this message at 04:21 on Jul 15, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 04:18
|
|
|
Nucleic Acids posted:I'll never understand how some women can internalize misogyny so much. Ah Pook posted:Hannity is really one of the few right wing commentators that's dumb and mean enough to believe it all. Over the years his views continually align with conservative Republican party rhetoric. They said it wasn't torture, he believes it isn't torture. Most likely someone just told him not to go through with it, and/or he's just a coward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 05:23
|
|
|
Fulchrum posted:
What debate was that? Also I definitely am going to be avoiding my usual right wing radio this week after the Trayvon verdict. I cannot imagine how ill I would feel to hear Hannity and jesus christ the smug coming off of Andy Dean will be palpable.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 05:47
|
|
|
Ramadu posted:What debate was that? Also I definitely am going to be avoiding my usual right wing radio this week after the Trayvon verdict. I cannot imagine how ill I would feel to hear Hannity and jesus christ the smug coming off of Andy Dean will be palpable. He's likely referring to the fact Hannity's original show was Hannity and Colmes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 05:49
|
|
|
Happy_Misanthrope posted:He's likely referring to the fact Hannity's original show was Hannity and Colmes. Yeah. Ditching him was pretty much the last sign that they no longer cared enough to even pretend to be balanced.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 05:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 15:47 |
|
|
Fulchrum posted:Yeah. Ditching him was pretty much the last sign that they no longer cared enough to even pretend to be balanced. When the original name for the show was Hannity and a liberal to be named later, I don't think balance was ever something to even be pretended. At the time Hannity was the rising star in NY radio and they were just looking to see if they could make something of him. People forget Fox News launched by just throwing poo poo at the wall to see what would stick. Ailes might be a GOP shithead, but before Rupert Murdoch he was working at what would turn into MSNBC. If they had given Carmen Electra a shift instead of someone like Burt Sugar or Paula Zahn and she took off in the ratings instead of Hannity and O'Reilly there's a greater than 0 chance we would have T&A News on basic cable right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2013 07:34
|
|
