Originally Posted by playwrite

It looks like some of the 'bright lights' on the Right have deducted that Baltimore is all Obama's fault, of course!







Maybe Barack was in the van severing spinal cords?

I can understand the Rightee hopefuls and media doing this; they give all their sheeple free handjobs if they could.

The Rightee's sheeple trying to find something Obama-bad here (e.g. "he said, "thug," ooh, so naughty-naughty") - why that's just good old fashion Obama Derangement Syndrome - in turned, caused by a combination of amygdala-dominated brains and daddy issues.

He's the most racially biased President that I've seen in office up to this point. How many times has he took a side on these issues, made a statement on these issues and ended up looking like an idiot to white voters?

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Not to butt too deeply into an intellectual discussion of the term, "thug", but the term is widely used to describe criminal behavior of many kinds. Source: Merriam-Webster.

Not a problem.

I believe I hear what you're saying. But, the term also has a lot of other connotations
(eg: Bone Thugs n Harmony). My point is that I think it's un-necessary to use it, and
that when people commenting on things use it to describe a whole bunch of different stuff,
there's probably going to be some confusion.

What do you think?


Prince

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Not a problem.

I believe I hear what you're saying. But, the term also has a lot of other connotations
(eg: Bone Thugs n Harmony). My point is that I think it's un-necessary to use it, and
that when people commenting on things use it to describe a whole bunch of different stuff,
there's probably going to be some confusion.

What do you think?


Prince

Thugs are generally criminal enforcers and criminal debt collectors (tough guys). Punks is a more appropriate term to apply to unruly teenagers rioting, looting and destroying whatever they want while knowing they'll be facing rather light opposition and minimal consequences for their actions.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

I agree it is kinda strange.

I guess my issue is that when Sec. Kerry uses "thugs" to describe ISIS-members,
and then politicians use "thugs" to describe those rioters in Baltimore, there's bound
to be confusion. Those rioters in Baltimore are also the kids of some of the residents.
I don't believe I would take too kindly to having my kid be compared to ISIS, either.

It's just so un-necessary, IMO. But, they're still using it, so ... I don't know.


Prince

I had no idea that Kerry was doing that. Even weirder. Almost like they're setting the stage for drone attacks in our inner cities.

Originally Posted by Eric the Green

I think there's more than 3 of us, and I'm not sure there's 3 of you right now, but vice-versa on the herd-minded and independent-minded. Delusion is always herd minded, and that's what trickle-down economics is. Herdminded delusion.



I do try to tell the truth as I see it, but I admit that I might be incorrect on occasion. On those rare occasions, I admit it!

But, if the simple truth comes across as arrogant, it might say more about the audience than the speaker too. Classic Xer seems unable to answer points, and falls back on emotion. And Prince does the same, except he doesn't fall back on emotion, so much as on the "classic Xer" refrain of "whatever." No matter, it's up to you guys to see the truth for yourselves, and I pray that you will, someday. Even now, I'm sure you can see the truth about some things. Just not very much that's political here on this forum, apparently.

Oh well, politics aren't everything. And when you are able to constructively debate and contribute to the discussion, that's well and good. Views other than mine, I welcome, even when I feel I must speak against them. If you call that "arrogant," that's your priviledge too

The truth as you see it is always the truth regardless of who, which side they're on and how many see the truth differently than you do. I answer your broader points with a few essential points that destroys or seriously undermines your broader point and flattens that balloon type ego of yours that is so common on the left. We are the problem is the truth as you know it. My problem is that I don't know the truth as you know it or recognize the truth as you see it or bow down and accept you as the all knowing like I should do in your opinion.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Thugs are generally criminal enforcers and criminal debt collectors (tough guys). Punks is a more appropriate term to apply to unruly teenagers rioting, looting and destroying whatever they want while knowing they'll be facing rather light opposition and minimal consequences for their actions.

Hey, Classic.

My issue isn't so much with using the term: "thug", as much as it is
with the same term(whatever is used) being used simultaneously
to describe ISIS and rioters in Baltimore. Personally, I think that's
a big mistake.


Prince

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

I had no idea that Kerry was doing that. Even weirder. Almost like they're setting the stage for drone attacks in our inner cities.

Yeah.
(and I really don't even wanna think about that.)


Prince

PS: I seriously hate fucking drones.

ETA: Heh. Let me re-word that. I seriously fucking hate drones.
(but the first way pretty much sucks, too. )

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Hey, Classic.

My issue isn't so much with using the term: "thug", as much as it is
with the same term(whatever is used) is being used simultaneously
to describe ISIS and rioters in Baltimore. Personally, I think that's
a big mistake.


Prince

Who cares? Do you think the rioters watch the news on a regular basis and are able to associate the broader use of the term? I don't care what the mayor called the immature idiots who went nuts and destroyed a bunch of stuff in her city. Just my opinion.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Who cares? Do you think the rioters watch the news on a regular basis and are able to associate the broader use of the term? I don't care what the mayor called the immature idiots who went nuts and destroyed a bunch of stuff in her city. Just my opinion.

The word might be better used to describe the police who caused the riot with their behavior toward young black folks, shooting them and fatally breaking their bones instead of protecting them or even just arresting them for the minor offenses they are usually accused of. The police should not act as enemies of the people, nor as judge, jury and executioner.

I notice that these "idiots" as you call them were breaking the law and destroying property; not exactly smart, it's true. But "thugs" is over the top (Hey, do I agree with Prince for once? )

Appropo of the topic, I can't think that all this helps Martin O'Malley much as a potential liberal challenger to Hillary Clinton (much as I predicted). It's reported that when mayor he instituted an increased arrest policy for petty crimes similar to Giuliani's in New York. It had the effect of increasing tension and violence, so it is said, despite an initial lower crime rate. And all his supposed "liberal" programs which he put into effect as governor didn't seem to help the people much in Baltimore and Maryland. Nor did they inspire confidence in the voters, who put in a Republican successor (talk about idiots; voters in a blue state putting Republicans in office? Not much help THERE for the needed improvements in police and social policy either!). I noticed that Maryland has had a problem compared to many blue states in some of their various stats, which generally by almost every measure show superiority to red states -see the "Is Connecticut the Best State to Live In?" thread.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

The truth as you see it is always the truth regardless of who, which side they're on and how many see the truth differently than you do. I answer your broader points with a few essential points that destroys or seriously undermines your broader point and flattens that balloon type ego of yours that is so common on the left. We are the problem is the truth as you know it. My problem is that I don't know the truth as you know it or recognize the truth as you see it or bow down and accept you as the all knowing like I should do in your opinion.

The truth as I see it, is the truth, if in fact it's the truth. And if it isn't, according to you, then it's up to you to demonstrate that, rather than falling back on emotional conclusions such as "I hate liberals." It kinda discredits your discourse when you do that. If my points and my ego are so flattened by your arguments, then why is it that it's you who ducks out and resorts to hate? The problem with you guys is not your existence as human beings, but the fact that, as I see it, you are deceived into believing opinions that detract from the proper and good function of our society, and which lead to poverty and racial division. And you don't seem willing to take a look at your opinions.

I have little hope of changing your mind, and you should have little hope of changing mine. Whether you bow down to me is not of concern to me, and if you don't wish to agree with me, that is pretty much what I expect. If you don't want to engage in meaningful discourse, that is your right as well. You certainly shouldn't expect that I would bend toward your point of view on political subjects. I am not going to embrace your current viewpoint; that's true. But if you wish a good debate, which sometimes you seem willing to do up to a point, then I always welcome that. The point is only to share our views with each other. Those on opposite sides like the two of us are not going to agree very often. Just accept that, and then a debate is fine, and may be informative to others.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Public schools are owned by the citizens of the community in which they're located in.

Which is also a government.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

Not owned by the government?

They are funded with taxes. They are maintained with government funds. Should the school building be sold, then the government gets the proceeds of the sale of the property.

Such may not apply if the government leases a building, which is possible but unlikely.

To right-wingers the only government is the Evil Monster Big Government in Washington, local governments somehow don't count.

Originally Posted by Seattleblue

On the bright side within 10 years many of the Boomer Babies will be dead, taking their religious Statist shit show with them. This crazy devotion to their blood god "Government" will die with them, and all the fetid air from their narcissistic miasma will finally blow away and disappear, never to haunt the culture again. The media juggernaut they have surrounded themselves with for the last 40 years will evaporate, and the money they inherited will no longer poison the economic well with their piss poor decision making.

Of all the horrendous "prophet" (more correctly "locust") traits, their fanatical belief in the piety of government bureaucrats as a priesthood devoted to that diety The State has to be the most dangerous. The propaganda they grew up with has ruined their minds beyond all repair, and they have done their best to visit the same on Gen Y. Millies grew up in a prison, and perhaps they will never recover. Certainly they lack the ability to think critically, substituting consensus for rational thought. Add to that the fact that there will be nothing to inherit after the next round of the financial crisis, and you begin to see the true fate of that generation.

Things are beginning to accelerate, and people are increasingly coming to understand that there is no political solution. Many people are seeing the corrupt politics as the source of the problem, and some portion of the public sees that politics and government by its very nature is "corrupt". It is a feature, the aim, of domination and control, not an unfortunate side effect of a loving God caring for us cradle to grave. While a small number of people, perhaps 8%, still has some kind of white collar steady job, the vast majority of people do not live in that delusional bubble world where the flag waves overhead, protecting us all with its radiant glory while government drones serve our every need. What a bunch of bullshit.

This understanding is at the core of the American tradition. It is this that is the source of the hated "exceptionalism", not the "American Dream" of paying a mortgage on a postage stamp property that we never really own, or any such nonsense. This disbelief in divine right and the essential equality of all people is the exceptionalism that the media hacks that spew propaganda deride so frequently now.

Americans have a unique and valuable culture that transcends the bounds of ethnicity, and it is this human progress that the owners of this country seek to destroy. But America has no aristocracy now, and it never will.

There is nothing to inherit after the Boomers squandered what the GI's gave them. There is no government fix for government rapaciousness. There is nothing but destruction of the old system and uncertainty afterward.

And it's going to be awesome.

I quit reading when I read "statism". YAWN.

Originally Posted by Marx & Lennon

Do you honestly see a difference between government and the people? Government grows from the people in this country ... especially at the local level.

If he were capable of understanding that he would not be a Movement Conservative spouting nonsense about evil government.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Xer vision extends beyond them and therefore does not include them.

Your post here is the definition of arrogance.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

He's the most racially biased President that I've seen in office up to this point. How many times has he took a side on these issues, made a statement on these issues and ended up looking like an idiot to white voters?

Unfounded statement.

Is anyone of any prominence egging rioters in Baltimore to loot, destroy property, or beat people up?

Here's one of your usual suspects:

People's World, publication of the Communist Party of the USA)

I see a physical model in spontaneous combustion: someone stupidly hoards oily rags that slowly degrade until some tiny bit ignites. Then a fire erupts.

Occasionally the Communists are right in their analysis of social realities even if they all but plagiarize liberal critiques of American capitalism and the politicians who enhance its vices.

There is no call for property destruction, personal violence, or looting.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Xer vision extends beyond them and therefore does not include them.

Crisis Eras go badly if cynical, callous Reactive types cut off the Idealist contribution to the resolution of a Crisis. The Axis Powers generally made that mistake, committing themselves to leadership with an agenda of revenge and economic exploitation. This image shows how badly things could go. Displaying the cadavers of Mussolini and associates dangling head-down is a touch fitting the treatment of some of the most egregious sinners in L'Inferno. In the end this man who had called for so many sacrifices for his glory was seen as a traitor.



Flawed as early and elite Boomer leadership has been, there are still Boomers capable of giving meaning and purpose to a Great Struggle, a meaning that transcends personal, class, and even national interest.



The 70-year-old man flashing the V-for-Victory sign would live to the ripe of age of 90. Churchill was the definitive Grey Champion.

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

Who cares? Do you think the rioters watch the news on a regular basis and are able to associate the broader use of the term?

I do. I care.

I'm going to tell you why I care, but first I want to say that I'm primarily and fundamentally
pretty much a 'Public Safety'-guy. So, basically I don't go for all that protesting and rioting
sorta thing. To me, in that context, a protest is pretty much just a potential riot waiting to
happen. But, I'm also interested in people having their voices be heard.

Bottom Line: In the moment, Public Safety trumps having someone's voice be heard.
It's basically my default position, so if it's necessary to kick some asses, so be it.
But, I would like to avoid having to do that, if at all reasonably possible.


So, why do I care?

In my experience, protesters and rioters can easily get all mixed-up.
Plus, now there's potential ISIS-recruits getting involved to consider.

ISIS is cutting-off people's heads, raping, and killing.
Those rioters in Baltimore are being extremely reckless
and putting lives at risk, but they're not ISIS. They're
the children of residents of Baltimore. And, although it
might be necessary to kick some asses, I want to always
keep in mind that they're somebody's children.

Last thing here. I was watching The Rachel Maddow Show
last night(I know, go figure! ) and she was talking to a guy
that was interviewing a girl from Baltimore named April Love.
(the interview starts around the 11:00 mark).

Now, I may not fully understand everything that she's going
through, but she's speaking my language(Accountability!).

So, eventhough I seriously dislike protesting, I do care about April Love.

That's why I care.


Prince

PS:

Originally Posted by Classic-X

I don't care what the mayor called the immature idiots who went nuts and destroyed a bunch of stuff in her city. Just my opinion.

And you're entitled to it. Believe me, I'm pretty much right there with you.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

Plus, now there's potential ISIS-recruits getting involved to consider.

Sometimes I wonder what it takes for an American-born "somebody's child" to join ISIS.

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

Sometimes I wonder what it takes for an American-born "somebody's child" to join ISIS.

In view of what ISIS does -- sociopathy seems absolutely necessary.

Originally Posted by pbrower2a

In view of what ISIS does -- sociopathy seems absolutely necessary.

That's stating the obvious. My wondering goes deeper than that.
Even Jeffrey Dahmer was somebody's child.

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

That's stating the obvious. My wondering goes deeper than that.
Even Jeffrey Dahmer was somebody's child.

I chalk it up as some folks are just born evil.

Originally Posted by princeofcats67

I do. I care.

I'm going to tell you why I care, but first I want to say that I'm primarily and fundamentally
pretty much a 'Public Safety'-guy. So, basically I don't go for all that protesting and rioting
sorta thing. To me, in that context, a protest is pretty much just a potential riot waiting to
happen. But, I'm also interested in people having their voices be heard.

Bottom Line: In the moment, Public Safety trumps having someone's voice be heard.
It's basically my default position, so if it's necessary to kick some asses, so be it.
But, I would like to avoid having to do that, if at all reasonably possible.


So, why do I care?

In my experience, protesters and rioters can easily get all mixed-up.
Plus, now there's potential ISIS-recruits getting involved to consider.

ISIS is cutting-off people's heads, raping, and killing.
Those rioters in Baltimore are being extremely reckless
and putting lives at risk, but they're not ISIS. They're
the children of residents of Baltimore. And, although it
might be necessary to kick some asses, I want to always
keep in mind that they're somebody's children.

Last thing here. I was watching The Rachel Maddow Show
last night(I know, go figure! ) and she was talking to a guy
that was interviewing a girl from Baltimore named April Love.
(the interview starts around the 11:00 mark).

Now, I may not fully understand everything that she's going
through, but she's speaking my language(Accountability!).

So, eventhough I seriously dislike protesting, I do care about April Love.

That's why I care.


Prince

PS:



And you're entitled to it. Believe me, I'm pretty much right there with you.

I appreciate that you care. April doesn't come across as being a thug. She obviously cares about the issue, the treatment of black folks by the system in general and wants the police who were involved to be held accountable for their actions. Unfortunately, she wants justice now and there's this little thing known due process getting in the way and interfering with her need for swift justice. I picked up on her hood mentality during the interview.

Originally Posted by nihilist moron

Sometimes I wonder what it takes for an American-born "somebody's child" to join ISIS.

Yeah, me too. I really don't know, and the thoughts I do
have are kinda too complex to try and share via the internet.

What do you think?


Prince

Originally Posted by Classic-X'er

I appreciate that you care. April doesn't come across as being a thug. She obviously cares about the issue, the treatment of black folks by the system in general and wants the police who were involved to be held accountable for their actions.

Yeah. And she's able to express herself in a manner that I can understand.

Originally Posted by Classic-X

Unfortunately, she wants justice now and there's this little thing known due process getting in the way and interfering with her need for swift justice.

I agree. and I've seen people throwing-around the word 'justice', and it seems
to me that they believe it means getting the outcome that they personally want.

Originally Posted by Classic-X

I picked up on her hood mentality during the interview.

I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean by 'hood mentality'.


Prince