MUScoop

Read the entire Georgia voting thread today:

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1270312105128988684?s=19

Quote from: shoothoops on June 09, 2020, 01:53:51 PM
Read the entire Georgia voting thread today:

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1270312105128988684?s=19

if you think it's bad now, just wait until November.

Both Georgia and Florida will be intentional clusterfucks come November.

have to think pictures/videos like these should speed up implementation of mail-in ballots

Quote from: TSmith34 on June 09, 2020, 03:31:14 PM
Both Georgia and Florida will be intentional clusterunnatural carnal knowledges come November.

Texas too. I would imagine Wisconsin will be bad as well. 

Georgia can do this because they suppressed enough votes in 2018 to elect Kemp as governor.

In April, the state's Republican House leader, David Ralston, publicly denounced the Republican secretary of state for sending absentee ballots to registered voters ahead of Tuesday's primary, which was postponed from its original May 19 date due to the pandemic. Ralston claimed mail-in voting is "devastating to Republicans."

Expect to see tons more of this in the fall. We know which party commits voter fraud  every election.

This is what voter suppression looks like.  I live in affluent northern burbs (majority white) and guess what?  There have been short waits, but nothing like they've seen in areas with predominantly African American populations.  This in not accidental. 

Presidential election day should be a federal/national holiday.

States can decide what they want to do for state/local/primary election days, though I subscribe to the thought that everyone should be given time to vote during the work day as part of state policy.

Quote from: jesmu84 on June 09, 2020, 04:13:10 PM
Presidential election day should be a federal/national holiday.

States can decide what they want to do for state/local/primary election days, though I subscribe to the thought that everyone should be given time to vote during the work day as part of state policy.

When I lived in NYC, working in academia I always got election day off.

There's a huge movement to ban required activity for student-athletes on election day this year with a lot of schools already committing to do so.

Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on June 09, 2020, 03:46:36 PM
This is what voter suppression looks like.  I live in affluent northern burbs (majority white) and guess what?  There have been short waits, but nothing like they've seen in areas with predominantly African American populations.  This in not accidental.

As Ozzie Guillen (and others) used to say: "If you ain't cheatin', you ain't tryin'."

IBTL.

Quote from: MUeng on June 09, 2020, 03:32:25 PM
have to think pictures/videos like these should speed up implementation of mail-in ballots

One party will never allow that.

Quote from: #UnleashJayce on June 09, 2020, 04:52:35 PM
One party will never allow that.

One party will resist it, but I think it is coming, slowly but surely. Society will demand it. When you can log in to Amazon and have a refrigerator delivered to you in 2 hours, it makes no sense to have to spend the time that you do for in-person voting.

https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/1270463218377506816?s=19

Quote from: shoothoops on June 09, 2020, 08:09:31 PM
https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/1270463218377506816?s=19

Make no mistake about it. This will be the trump/republican playbook in November.

Steal the election through voter suppression.  This was not an unexpected outcome today. It is what Republicans have fought for. A continuation of their racist policies when it comes to voting.

They'd bring back the poll tax if they thought they could get away with it.

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1270554138502406144?s=19

https://twitter.com/AriBerman/status/1270685980526358528?s=19

All the talk of voting improprieties ... all the talk of potential fraud ... all the evils that mail-in voting supposedly will bring ...

And yet Georgia cheats right out in the open, brazenly. They did it in 2018, and they're doing it again this year. I'd admire their chutzpah, if it weren't un-American, immoral and unethical.

But yeah ... mail-in voting, which 5 states do without any problems and which the Hypocrite In Chief himself does ... that guarantees fraud will occur.

Quote from: TSmith34 on June 09, 2020, 05:41:59 PM
One party will resist it, but I think it is coming, slowly but surely. Society will demand it. When you can log in to Amazon and have a refrigerator delivered to you in 2 hours, it makes no sense to have to spend the time that you do for in-person voting.

Except that it verifys that it us you, that ur breathing, and not hacked or coerced. Smh
What a blind liberal lovefest, not here to say current systems dont have their issues, but to simply say make this change and everything will be great is par for the course.

Quote from: TSmith34 on June 09, 2020, 05:41:59 PM
When you can log in to Amazon and have a refrigerator delivered to you in 2 hours, it makes no sense to have to spend the time that you do for in-person voting.

I get what you're saying about the fridge, but let's take it one step further and perhaps even more relevantly regarding the issue at hand ...

Many of us have online brokerage accounts with significant assets in them.

And yet, somehow, we are able to move those assets and do transactions worth thousands ... tens of thousands ... hundreds of thousands of dollars ... quickly, safely, securely and effectively.

Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, etc, "know it is us" doing the transactions, and I am not aware of a single episode of one of these major brokerage houses being hacked or defrauded. Maybe there has been one, but I don't know of one.

Do what they do to secure the safety, security and efficiency of the voting process. I'm not a techie, but it has to be possible ... because they do it.

Quote from: MU82 on June 10, 2020, 09:06:07 AM
I get what you're saying about the fridge, but let's take it one step further and perhaps even more relevantly regarding the issue at hand ...

Many of us have online brokerage accounts with significant assets in them.

And yet, somehow, we are able to move those assets and do transactions worth thousands ... tens of thousands ... hundreds of thousands of dollars ... quickly, safely, securely and effectively.

Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, etc, "know it is us" doing the transactions, and I am not aware of a single episode of one of these major brokerage houses being hacked or defrauded. Maybe there has been one, but I don't know of one.

Do what they do to secure the safety, security and efficiency of the voting process. I'm not a techie, but it has to be possible ... because they do it.

Yup, your comparison certainly goes to the security aspect of it. Good point. I was primarily pointing out the convenience and efficiency of mail-in voting.

Quote from: MU82 on June 10, 2020, 09:06:07 AM
I get what you're saying about the fridge, but let's take it one step further and perhaps even more relevantly regarding the issue at hand ...

Many of us have online brokerage accounts with significant assets in them.

And yet, somehow, we are able to move those assets and do transactions worth thousands ... tens of thousands ... hundreds of thousands of dollars ... quickly, safely, securely and effectively.

Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, etc, "know it is us" doing the transactions, and I am not aware of a single episode of one of these major brokerage houses being hacked or defrauded. Maybe there has been one, but I don't know of one.

Do what they do to secure the safety, security and efficiency of the voting process. I'm not a techie, but it has to be possible ... because they do it.

Good points.  I've been filing my taxes for years via an online portal with my SSN all over the place.  Why the hell can't we have an online voting portal giving access to nearly everyone with a smart device?  Oh wait, fear propaganda saying "but what if your vote gets hacked?"

Quote from: MUeng on June 10, 2020, 09:40:27 AM
Good points.  I've been filing my taxes for years via an online portal with my SSN all over the place.  Why the hell can't we have an online voting portal giving access to nearly everyone with a smart device?  Oh wait, fear propaganda saying "but what if your vote gets hacked?"

I know it is a rhetorical question but I will answer it anyway. It is solely because one corrupt political party will not allow it. They revel in the fact that it is harder to vote in the USA than any other industrialized country in the world.

It is simply massive republican voter fraud.

Quote from: MUeng on June 10, 2020, 09:40:27 AM
Good points.  I've been filing my taxes for years via an online portal with my SSN all over the place.  Why the hell can't we have an online voting portal giving access to nearly everyone with a smart device?  Oh wait, fear propaganda saying "but what if your vote gets hacked?"

This is easily solved.  Multi-factor authentication.  My company does it so I can log in to Outlook...I think the Federal Govt. can figure it out to allow people to vote. 

Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on June 10, 2020, 09:57:57 AM
This is easily solved.  Multi-factor authentication.  My company does it so I can log in to Outlook...I think the Federal Govt. can figure it out to allow people to vote.

Seems like a no-brainer. You can't make all voting online because there still are a lot of Americans who do not have online access, but it certainly should be doable.

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 08:57:36 AM
Except that it verifys that it us you, that ur breathing, and not hacked or coerced. Smh
What a blind liberal lovefest, not here to say current systems dont have their issues, but to simply say make this change and everything will be great is par for the course.

I vote by mail. I have to sign it and the signature is matched to what is in file. I can track my ballot to make sure it's delivered. Since 2000 we've had 22 documented cases of fraud.  In the March, in the midst of the pandemic, for a primary we had over 40% turnout. I got to vote at my office desk.

Quote from: MU82 on June 10, 2020, 09:06:07 AM
I get what you're saying about the fridge, but let's take it one step further and perhaps even more relevantly regarding the issue at hand ...

Many of us have online brokerage accounts with significant assets in them.

And yet, somehow, we are able to move those assets and do transactions worth thousands ... tens of thousands ... hundreds of thousands of dollars ... quickly, safely, securely and effectively.

Vanguard, Fidelity, Schwab, etc, "know it is us" doing the transactions, and I am not aware of a single episode of one of these major brokerage houses being hacked or defrauded. Maybe there has been one, but I don't know of one.

Do what they do to secure the safety, security and efficiency of the voting process. I'm not a techie, but it has to be possible ... because they do it.

So stupid, u know elections are held by local election boards, that work a few days a year etc.?  And are not multi national multi billion dollar companies.  Additionally millions of people do not have internet etc.  Lastly, still ripe for fraud and coercion.  Not every problem is best fixed by billions of dollars and another federal agency and hundreds of thousands of employees.  Very simple minded.

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 11:06:49 AM
So stupid, u know elections are held by local election boards, that work a few days a year etc.?  And are not multi national multi billion dollar companies.  Additionally millions of people do not have internet etc.  Lastly, still ripe for fraud and coercion.  Not every problem is best fixed by billions of dollars and another federal agency and hundreds of thousands of employees.  Very simple minded.

Right, because mail-in voting, which is already done, is just too hard to figure out. And secure online voting, employing security that tens of thousands of companies already require, is just too hard to figure out. Too hard, too hard.

Each county should just hire the company that did the Obamacare website, aina.

Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on June 10, 2020, 09:57:57 AM
This is easily solved.  Multi-factor authentication.  My company does it so I can log in to Outlook...I think the Federal Govt. can figure it out to allow people to vote.

Of course you are right. But getting it right is not the problem.

The problem is that it is an organized attempt to prevent people from voting.

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 11:06:49 AM
So stupid, u know elections are held by local election boards, that work a few days a year etc.?  And are not multi national multi billion dollar companies.  Additionally millions of people do not have internet etc.  Lastly, still ripe for fraud and coercion.  Not every problem is best fixed by billions of dollars and another federal agency and hundreds of thousands of employees.  Very simple minded.

At least use proper grammar in you crazed responses.

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 11:06:49 AM
So stupid, u know elections are held by local election boards, that work a few days a year etc.?  And are not multi national multi billion dollar companies.  Additionally millions of people do not have internet etc.  Lastly, still ripe for fraud and coercion.  Not every problem is best fixed by billions of dollars and another federal agency and hundreds of thousands of employees.  Very simple minded.

As usual, you are wrong, and you provide no legitimate reasons for your point of view.

And as usual, you start with an insult. Because that's how you roll.

Quote from: Jockey on June 10, 2020, 11:36:13 AM
Of course you are right. But getting it right is not the problem.

The problem is that it is an organized attempt to prevent people from voting.

Oh I am well aware.

Quote from: TSmith34 on June 10, 2020, 11:13:01 AM
Right, because mail-in voting, which is already done, is just too hard to figure out. And secure online voting, employing security that tens of thousands of companies already require, is just too hard to figure out. Too hard, too hard.

I oppose internet-based voting because even with multi-tiered security. Foreign actors will find a way to hack in, just look at North Korea and what they've been able to do by dedicating themselves to cyber warfare. Plus, you need a paper trail to prevent fraud. Mail-in is the way to go.

Quote from: Billy Hoyle on June 10, 2020, 01:12:14 PM
I oppose internet-based voting because even with multi-tiered security. Foreign actors will find a way to hack in, just look at North Korea and what they've been able to do by dedicating themselves to cyber warfare. Plus, you need a paper trail to prevent fraud. Mail-in is the way to go.

Foreign actors are currently able to hack into our voter machines. Does that bother you, too?

Quote from: Billy Hoyle on June 10, 2020, 01:12:14 PM
I oppose internet-based voting because even with multi-tiered security. Foreign actors will find a way to hack in, just look at North Korea and what they've been able to do by dedicating themselves to cyber warfare. Plus, you need a paper trail to prevent fraud. Mail-in is the way to go.

Why don't they hack into Vanguard's system so they can become trillionaires?

Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on June 10, 2020, 11:32:15 AM
Each county should just hire the company that did the Obamacare website, aina.

Ah yes, the one that really bad roll out for about 4-5 months, that then got infinitely better and to this day helps get TENS OF MILLIONS affordable health care.  Oh gosh please, that would be horrible.

Quote from: reinko on June 10, 2020, 02:48:05 PM
Ah yes, the one that really bad roll out for about 4-5 months, that then got infinitely better and to this day helps get TENS OF MILLIONS affordable health care.  Oh gosh please, that would be horrible.

Don't pick on him...he'll throw a fit and threaten to leave.

Quote from: Jockey on June 10, 2020, 01:48:47 PM
Foreign actors are currently able to hack into our voter machines. Does that bother you, too?

Two years ago a hacker at the big Las Vegas Tech Convention as a demonstration hacked into a voter database somewhere in like 10 minutes.

Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 10, 2020, 04:27:12 PM
Two years ago a hacker at the big Las Vegas Tech Convention as a demonstration hacked into a voter database somewhere in like 10 minutes.

And Senator McTurtle has done everything in his power to block election security bills.  Wonder why?

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/454742-mcconnell-blocks-two-election-security-bills
https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482569-senate-gop-blocks-three-election-security-bills

Serious question... If mail-in or online voting is bad because of the chance of hack/fraud/whatever.. why do we let nearly every other bit of government and private business take place in those realms?

Quote from: MU82 on June 09, 2020, 09:53:55 PM
They'd bring back the poll tax if they thought they could get away with it.

I think abolishing the poll tax was a mistake. We should bring it back would be healthy for both sides of the political spectrum.

Quote from: Herman Cain on June 10, 2020, 08:40:43 PM
I think abolishing the poll tax was a mistake. We should bring it back would be healthy for both sides of the political spectrum.

uhhhh what, you can't be serious.

Quote from: Herman Cain on June 10, 2020, 08:40:43 PM
I think abolishing the poll tax was a mistake. We should bring it back would be healthy for both sides of the political spectrum.

So you think poor people should have no right to vote.

You're a real Amurican ?-(

Quote from: Herman Cain on June 10, 2020, 08:40:43 PM
I think abolishing the poll tax was a mistake. We should bring it back would be healthy for both sides of the political spectrum.

Your proposal, while a step in the right direction, doesn't go nearly far enough. Voting should be limited to white male land owners.  It is, after all, the way our Founding Fathers wanted it.

Two suggestions before this gets locked:
1.  If I can pay tens of thousands of dollars in taxes through a secure IRS website, why can't I vote through a secure web site?
2.  let's tie the two together... everyone gets one vote for every dollar of taxes they pay. 

Quote from: Jockey on June 10, 2020, 01:48:47 PM
Foreign actors are currently able to hack into our voter machines. Does that bother you, too?

Yes, it does. Which is why I support paper only.

Oh, and domestic actors can change vote totals with no paper trail.

Quote from: WarriorFan on June 10, 2020, 09:39:18 PM
Two suggestions before this gets locked:
1.  If I can pay tens of thousands of dollars in taxes through a secure IRS website, why can't I vote through a secure web site?
2.  let's tie the two together... everyone gets one vote for every dollar of taxes they pay.

How many Americans have the internet?  How discriminitory,  thought the characters in this string were more woke than that.

Speaking of Georgia, it's about to send a QAnon believer to Congress.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marjorie-green-a-georgia-republican-is-poised-to-become-congress-first-qanon-believing-member?ref=home

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 10:05:32 PM
How many Americans have the internet?  How discriminitory,  thought the characters in this string were more woke than that.

Nobody is saying only allow online voting. Obviously, we need other forms of voting for those who don't have internet service or have some other situation that would prevent them from voting online.

Quote from: MUeng on June 09, 2020, 03:32:25 PM
have to think pictures/videos like these should speed up implementation of mail-in ballots

Then your vote is made public and not cast privately. I prefer a private/secret ballot which would be impossible with mail-in ballots. Do you want Trump or anyone else collecting your voting history. I don't.

https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/08/11/voting-public-or-private-act-your-ballot-not-secret-you-think

We need paper back-ups.  How else can you do a recount? 

Quote from: Mr. Sand-Knit on June 10, 2020, 10:05:32 PM
How many Americans have the internet?  How discriminitory,  thought the characters in this string were more woke than that.

Those that don't have smart phones, Rhoda that don't can go to the library, those that don't have a library or smart phone can vote mail in, those that don't can stand in line. Yeah that too discriminatory.

Quote from: MU Fan in Connecticut on June 10, 2020, 04:27:12 PM
Two years ago a hacker at the big Las Vegas Tech Convention as a demonstration hacked into a voter database somewhere in like 10 minutes.

Was that voter database using the same kind of security system that keeps Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab, JPMorgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, etc, from getting hacked into?

Those and other brokerage houses and major banks hold trillions of dollars in assets. I don't know about you, but I have all of my investments and savings in them. Somehow, the hackers aren't able to get in there -- and I doubt it's because they haven't tried.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 07:18:11 AM
Then your vote is made public and not cast privately. I prefer a private/secret ballot which would be impossible with mail-in ballots. Do you want Trump or anyone else collecting your voting history. I don't.

https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/08/11/voting-public-or-private-act-your-ballot-not-secret-you-think

Such utter nonsense. Your vote is not made public.

Quote from: MU82 on June 11, 2020, 08:55:22 AM
Was that voter database using the same kind of security system that keeps Vanguard, Fidelity and Schwab, JPMorgan Chase, Merrill Lynch, etc, from getting hacked into?

Those and other brokerage houses and major banks hold trillions of dollars in assets. I don't know about you, but I have all of my investments and savings in them. Somehow, the hackers aren't able to get in there -- and I doubt it's because they haven't tried.

I think the point of his hack was to show the system needed to be upgraded as you indicated here.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 07:18:11 AM
Then your vote is made public and not cast privately. I prefer a private/secret ballot which would be impossible with mail-in ballots. Do you want Trump or anyone else collecting your voting history. I don't.

This is wrong. And Trump just voted by mail.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 07:18:11 AM
Then your vote is made public and not cast privately. I prefer a private/secret ballot which would be impossible with mail-in ballots. Do you want Trump or anyone else collecting your voting history. I don't.

https://www.americamagazine.org/politics-society/2017/08/11/voting-public-or-private-act-your-ballot-not-secret-you-think

How is voting with a paper ballot by mail, which has been done for years by the way, any different then doing it by paper ballot in person?

Quote from: Pakuni on June 10, 2020, 10:13:00 PM
Speaking of Georgia, it's about to send a QAnon believer to Congress.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/marjorie-green-a-georgia-republican-is-poised-to-become-congress-first-qanon-believing-member?ref=home

I'm sure Chicos will tell you its both sides. Both sides.

Quote from: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 11, 2020, 10:33:28 AM

How is voting with a paper ballot by mail, which has been done for years by the way, any different then doing it by paper ballot in person?

I never voted with a paper ballot. Do you sign the ballot or do you sign the registration book and then cast an anonymous paper ballot? Here in New Jersey or at least at my precinct we sign the registration book and then secretly cast the vote electronically in a voting booth that produces a printed copy which you place in a sealed box. That way they can validate the votes cast with votes printed.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 01:25:14 PM
I never voted with a paper ballot. Do you sign the ballot or do you sign the registration book and then cast an anonymous paper ballot? Here in New Jersey or at least at my precinct we sign the registration book and then secretly cast the vote electronically in a voting booth that produces a printed copy which you place in a sealed box. That way they can validate the votes cast with votes printed.

When you vote by mail, you sign your envelope and your ballot is inside.  It's the same basic process as voting in person.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 11, 2020, 01:43:21 PM
When you vote by mail, you sign your envelope and your ballot is inside.  It's the same basic process as voting in person.

Yep.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 11, 2020, 01:43:21 PM
When you vote by mail, you sign your envelope and your ballot is inside.  It's the same basic process as voting in person.

So when they open the envelope they know how you voted, no?

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 02:44:32 PM
So when they open the envelope they know how you voted, no?

As much as the person who is standing at the machine when I feed my ballot in person.  Except they're putting it in the machine.  I'm failing to see your point.

Is your entire method of arguing simply trying to poke holes that can be easily filled?

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 02:44:32 PM
So when they open the envelope they know how you voted, no?

I'm just curious as to what you think they do.

With thousands or even tens of thousands of votes to count, do you think they have time to stop and record whose name was on the envelope for each and every vote? Remember that there are reps from both parties in the room when the ballots are counted.

Yes.  In that one brief instance of time, some county clerk will know how I voted.  On the spectrum of things I am worried about privacy wise, that ranks pretty far down the list.

Quote from: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 11, 2020, 03:15:59 PM
Yes.  In that one brief instance of time, some county clerk will know how I voted.  On the spectrum of things I am worried about privacy wise, that ranks pretty far down the list.

We give our privacy info out ALL THE TIME over the internet and mail.

TONS of sensitive business and government programs are done on the internet and by mail.

Why is voting through one or both of those so taboo?

Quote from: jesmu84 on June 11, 2020, 03:33:18 PM
We give our privacy info out ALL THE TIME over the internet and mail.

TONS of sensitive business and government programs are done on the internet and by mail.

Why is voting through one or both of those so taboo?

Because its about voter repression under the guise of the fear of voter fraud.

Data mining companies have thousands- even tens of thousands of pieces of data on the majority of people in this country.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 11, 2020, 02:44:32 PM
So when they open the envelope they know how you voted, no?

Yep, just as they knew how President Pandemic voted when he voted by mail in Florida's primary.

Quote from: MU82 on June 11, 2020, 04:30:25 PM
Yep, just as they knew how President Pandemic voted when he voted by mail in Florida's primary.

After he commited voter fraud while registering.

Quote from: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 11, 2020, 04:32:45 PM

After he commited voter fraud while registering.

That's right.  He put his New York address on the form.

There are a lot of people in this room with short memories. After the last election, do you seriously think we should have online voting? Seriously?

Whoever loses will challenge over and over again, claiming everything from voter suppression to foreign hacking. And if it is ever proven that someone hacked into the election systems, God-forbid the implication on our country.

My hang-up with mail-in ballots, online voting etc., goes to the sacredness of voting in our country. C'mon, you're saying this country is too damn lazy to get up on a Tuesday morning in November, walk, ride a bus or drive to a polling place, wait their turn in line, cast a ballot and maybe see someone from the neighborhood and chat for a few minutes and go home? That's what voting is about. It's the most important thing as Americans we do.

If any political party can't get people to do this simple act once or twice a year, shame on them. Maybe they should start looking at candidates who really will make a difference in people's lives.

As a final thought, perhaps I've lived in Illinois too long but if Old Man Daley could steal an election for John F. Kennedy with paper ballots, think of what he could do with a computer. Or, unlimited mail-in ballots. Gosh, in Texas, Lyndon Johnson might have received a million votes from Jim Wells County back in 1948!

Quote from: WarriorFan on June 10, 2020, 09:39:18 PM
Two suggestions before this gets locked:
1.  If I can pay tens of thousands of dollars in taxes through a secure IRS website, why can't I vote through a secure web site?
2.  let's tie the two together... everyone gets one vote for every dollar of taxes they pay.

if someone wants to hack into my "secure irs website" to pay my taxes, hack away eyn'a?

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 16, 2020, 05:44:25 AM
There are a lot of people in this room with short memories. After the last election, do you seriously think we should have online voting? Seriously?

Whoever loses will challenge over and over again, claiming everything from voter suppression to foreign hacking. And if it is ever proven that someone hacked into the election systems, God-forbid the implication on our country.

My hang-up with mail-in ballots, online voting etc., goes to the sacredness of voting in our country. C'mon, you're saying this country is too damn lazy to get up on a Tuesday morning in November, walk, ride a bus or drive to a polling place, wait their turn in line, cast a ballot and maybe see someone from the neighborhood and chat for a few minutes and go home? That's what voting is about. It's the most important thing as Americans we do.

If any political party can't get people to do this simple act once or twice a year, shame on them. Maybe they should start looking at candidates who really will make a difference in people's lives.

As a final thought, perhaps I've lived in Illinois too long but if Old Man Daley could steal an election for John F. Kennedy with paper ballots, think of what he could do with a computer. Or, unlimited mail-in ballots. Gosh, in Texas, Lyndon Johnson might have received a million votes from Jim Wells County back in 1948!

Just regarding your Daley/Kennedy assertion. Some fact checking is due.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2017/08/08/heres-a-voter-fraud-myth-richard-daley-stole-illinois-for-john-kennedy-in-the-1960-election/%3foutputType=amp

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 16, 2020, 05:44:25 AM
There are a lot of people in this room with short memories. After the last election, do you seriously think we should have online voting? Seriously?

Whoever loses will challenge over and over again, claiming everything from voter suppression to foreign hacking. And if it is ever proven that someone hacked into the election systems, God-forbid the implication on our country.

My hang-up with mail-in ballots, online voting etc., goes to the sacredness of voting in our country. C'mon, you're saying this country is too damn lazy to get up on a Tuesday morning in November, walk, ride a bus or drive to a polling place, wait their turn in line, cast a ballot and maybe see someone from the neighborhood and chat for a few minutes and go home? That's what voting is about. It's the most important thing as Americans we do.

If any political party can't get people to do this simple act once or twice a year, shame on them. Maybe they should start looking at candidates who really will make a difference in people's lives.

As a final thought, perhaps I've lived in Illinois too long but if Old Man Daley could steal an election for John F. Kennedy with paper ballots, think of what he could do with a computer. Or, unlimited mail-in ballots. Gosh, in Texas, Lyndon Johnson might have received a million votes from Jim Wells County back in 1948!

Recent Georgia example:

Machines weren't working, not enough machines, not enough workers, closed locations, relocated locations, long lines, .....these things keep happening disproportionately in minority communities and low socio-economic communities. Many changes have occurred last minute. Some people were even turned away at locations in March in Chicago.

What is the goal? Is the goal to ensure that every of age can and does vote in the country? To get as many people to vote as possible?

National multi-day voting Holiday including part weekend, part weekday, as well as other ways to vote for those unable to vote in person, to ensure everyone can and does vote.

I strongly suggest you spend a voting day in a low socio-economic geography. Experience is a cure for ignorance.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 16, 2020, 05:44:25 AM
C'mon, you're saying this country is too damn lazy to get up on a Tuesday morning in November, walk, ride a bus or drive to a polling place, wait their turn in line, cast a ballot and maybe see someone from the neighborhood and chat for a few minutes and go home? That's what voting is about. It's the most important thing as Americans we do.

This is something that just doesn't even need to be a thing.  I've been in required meetings, other countries, other states, etc for my job and it's a huge hassle to vote absentee (which i have always done for federal elections, but not always state/local).  Are you calling me lazy - are you calling the person that has to take a bus to work on election day lazy?   

It's dumb.  Open voting up -- make it more convenient.  I am open to any method deemed appropriate, but constraints can be lifted for the benefit of all.. and particularly the benefit of people who work. 

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 16, 2020, 05:44:25 AM
There are a lot of people in this room with short memories. After the last election, do you seriously think we should have online voting? Seriously?

Whoever loses will challenge over and over again, claiming everything from voter suppression to foreign hacking. And if it is ever proven that someone hacked into the election systems, God-forbid the implication on our country.

My hang-up with mail-in ballots, online voting etc., goes to the sacredness of voting in our country. C'mon, you're saying this country is too damn lazy to get up on a Tuesday morning in November, walk, ride a bus or drive to a polling place, wait their turn in line, cast a ballot and maybe see someone from the neighborhood and chat for a few minutes and go home? That's what voting is about. It's the most important thing as Americans we do.

If any political party can't get people to do this simple act once or twice a year, shame on them. Maybe they should start looking at candidates who really will make a difference in people's lives.

As a final thought, perhaps I've lived in Illinois too long but if Old Man Daley could steal an election for John F. Kennedy with paper ballots, think of what he could do with a computer. Or, unlimited mail-in ballots. Gosh, in Texas, Lyndon Johnson might have received a million votes from Jim Wells County back in 1948!

I would love to live in the utopia where the bolded was all it took to vote.  Instead, I live in the good old US of A where there are folks actively trying (and so far succeeding) to make such a utopia impossible for a large segment of our population.  So spare us your indignation and realize that most of the country doesn't live in Mayberry. 

Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on June 16, 2020, 08:50:46 AM
I would love to live in the utopia where the bolded was all it took to vote.  Instead, I live in the good old US of A where there are folks actively trying (and so far succeeding) to make such a utopia impossible for a large segment of our population.  So spare us your indignation and realize that most of the country doesn't live in Mayberry.

Help me understand the angst and disgust many* liberals have with the USA, while advocating vociferously for open borders, sanctuary cities, and refuge for POC from around the world?  Yet, simultaneously asserting that the USA is soooo racist and stacked against POC?  Seriously, what is it like to live in a seeming perpetual state of hypocrisy and angst?

Why is it that the USA is the most sought after country to gain citizenship, residence?

Do you not find it odd that some born and raised here hate their own country while so many from around the world would do anything to live here?

End of the day, if a person takes their education seriously, works hard, is law abiding, and accountable to their family - they will have a standard and quality of life that exceeds anywhere else in the world.  Not to mention they also have opportunity to become massively successful.

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 10:01:34 AM
Help me understand the angst and disgust many* liberals have with the USA, while advocating vociferously for open borders, sanctuary cities, and refuge for POC from around the world?  Yet, simultaneously asserting that the USA is soooo racist and stacked against POC?  Seriously, what is it like to live in a seeming perpetual state of hypocrisy and angst?

Why is it that the USA is the most sought after country to gain citizenship, residence?

Do you not find it odd that some born and raised here hate their own country while so many from around the world would do anything to live here?

End of the day, if a person takes their education seriously, works hard, is law abiding, and accountable to their family - they will have a standard and quality of life that exceeds anywhere else in the world.  Not to mention they also have opportunity to become massively successful.

Started typing a response, not worth getting a thread locked so reported it instead.

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 10:01:34 AM


End of the day, if a person takes their education seriously, works hard, is law abiding, and accountable to their family - they will have a standard and quality of life that exceeds anywhere else in the world.  Not to mention they also have opportunity to become massively successful.

You trip over your white privilege an awful lot. The systems, structures and institutions of this country were created by whites to benefit whites.

Finally, for the first time in history, we have a chance to change that. Sadly, that means millions of whites who hang on to the old values of privilege will be left behind trying to hang on to the old order.

Y'all don't know what it's like being male, middle class and white.

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 10:01:34 AM
Help me understand the angst and disgust many* liberals have with the USA, while advocating vociferously for open borders, sanctuary cities, and refuge for POC from around the world?  Yet, simultaneously asserting that the USA is soooo racist and stacked against POC?  Seriously, what is it like to live in a seeming perpetual state of hypocrisy and angst?

Why is it that the USA is the most sought after country to gain citizenship, residence?

Do you not find it odd that some born and raised here hate their own country while so many from around the world would do anything to live here?

End of the day, if a person takes their education seriously, works hard, is law abiding, and accountable to their family - they will have a standard and quality of life that exceeds anywhere else in the world.  Not to mention they also have opportunity to become massively successful.

Not possible, not going to try.

Quote from: Jockey on June 16, 2020, 11:36:58 AM

Finally, for the first time in history, we have a chance to change that. Sadly, that means millions of whites who hang on to the old values of privilege will be left behind trying to hang on to the old order.

Cultural attitudes don't change quickly, and especially not with a few weeks of protest.   


There will be police policy changes, sure. 

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 10:01:34 AM
Help me understand the angst and disgust many* liberals have with the USA, while advocating vociferously for open borders, sanctuary cities, and refuge for POC from around the world?  Yet, simultaneously asserting that the USA is soooo racist and stacked against POC?  Seriously, what is it like to live in a seeming perpetual state of hypocrisy and angst?

Why is it that the USA is the most sought after country to gain citizenship, residence?

Do you not find it odd that some born and raised here hate their own country while so many from around the world would do anything to live here?

End of the day, if a person takes their education seriously, works hard, is law abiding, and accountable to their family - they will have a standard and quality of life that exceeds anywhere else in the world.  Not to mention they also have opportunity to become massively successful.

The black EMT executed by cops serving a no-knock warrant in Louisville, the black church-goers executed by a white supremacist in Charleston, or any of the thousands upon thousands of innocent black folks killed, harassed or discriminated against solely because of the color of their skin ... I'm sure it's of great solace to their families to know how "massively successful" they could have become.

Meanwhile, "reverse racism" just keeps holding down us white men. Woe is us!

Oh, and absolutely ... those of us who want America to be better for all inhabitants, we obviously "hate our own country." It's kind of like those who want MU basketball to be better obviously "hate" Marquette basketball.

Thanks, Ners. It's nice when you stop by to give your fellow Scoopers the honor of getting lectured on race relations by a racist.

This is way off topic, but so is the rest of this thread ... Remember the black federal agent killed during George Floyd protests in Oakland and held up as an example of BLM violence?
Turns out he was killed by a right-wing extremists.
What's really scary is that one of these guys is active duty military.

Bennett said evidence developed in the case showed communication between Carrillo and others talking about using the George Floyd demonstration planned for Oakland that night as a cover to kill Underwood and wound his partner.
"We believe Carrillo and Justice chose this date because of the planned protest in Oakland," Bennett said. "It provided them to target multiple law enforcement personnel and to avoid apprehension due to the large crowds attending the demonstrations. As described in detail in the complaint, we believe Justice drove the white van."

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/16/steven-carrillo-david-underwood-murder-santa-cruz-deputy-fatal-shooting-fatal-oakland-federal-building-shooting/

Quote from: Pakuni on June 16, 2020, 02:31:59 PM
This is way off topic, but so is the rest of this thread ... Remember the black federal agent killed during George Floyd protests in Oakland and held up as an example of BLM violence?
Turns out he was killed by a right-wing extremists.
What's really scary is that one of these guys is active duty military.

Bennett said evidence developed in the case showed communication between Carrillo and others talking about using the George Floyd demonstration planned for Oakland that night as a cover to kill Underwood and wound his partner.
"We believe Carrillo and Justice chose this date because of the planned protest in Oakland," Bennett said. "It provided them to target multiple law enforcement personnel and to avoid apprehension due to the large crowds attending the demonstrations. As described in detail in the complaint, we believe Justice drove the white van."

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/16/steven-carrillo-david-underwood-murder-santa-cruz-deputy-fatal-shooting-fatal-oakland-federal-building-shooting/

Fun fact, Fox News made zero mention to their connections to a far right movement. That's that fair and honest news so many here use. Probably see a tan guy in a mugshot and assume it's the mythical "Antifa" organization.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/us/air-force-sergeant-steven-carrillo-hit-with-murder-charges-in-deputys-killing.amp

Here's a pleasant guy who has been elected 4 times already ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article243568942.html?

Frustrated by weeks of protests, a North Carolina lawmaker has lashed out at what he calls "gutless wonders in public office who are bowing down to Black Lives Matter."

Republican Rep. Larry Pittman of Cabarrus County called protesters "ignorant thugs," "criminals," "domestic terrorists" and "vermin." If they resist and attack police, he said they should "shoot them."

"This is war," he wrote on Facebook Monday. "Our people have a right to expect our leaders to be on our side, not surrender to the lawless, godless mob."

Pittman, 65, is running for his fifth term.

"These vermin don't care about George Floyd or any other individual, except maybe their financial sponsor, George Soros," Pittman wrote. "They are bent on destroying our country and our way of life, and they will use any tragedy, any slogan, any excuse to convince clueless people that their radical injustice is justice."

In the past, he compared Lincoln to Hitler, and said that doctors who perform abortions should be hung in public.

Oh, and he's a pastor.

Quote from: mu_hilltopper on June 16, 2020, 02:12:39 PM

Cultural attitudes don't change quickly, and especially not with a few weeks of protest.   


There will be police policy changes, sure.

No they don't, but the seeds have finally been planted and watered.

Quote from: MU82 on June 16, 2020, 03:01:16 PM
Here's a pleasant guy who has been elected 4 times already ...

https://www.charlotteobserver.com/news/politics-government/article243568942.html?

Frustrated by weeks of protests, a North Carolina lawmaker has lashed out at what he calls "gutless wonders in public office who are bowing down to Black Lives Matter."

Republican Rep. Larry Pittman of Cabarrus County called protesters "ignorant thugs," "criminals," "domestic terrorists" and "vermin." If they resist and attack police, he said they should "shoot them."

"This is war," he wrote on Facebook Monday. "Our people have a right to expect our leaders to be on our side, not surrender to the lawless, godless mob."

Pittman, 65, is running for his fifth term.

"These vermin don't care about George Floyd or any other individual, except maybe their financial sponsor, George Soros," Pittman wrote. "They are bent on destroying our country and our way of life, and they will use any tragedy, any slogan, any excuse to convince clueless people that their radical injustice is justice."

In the past, he compared Lincoln to Hitler, and said that doctors who perform abortions should be hung in public.

Oh, and he's a pastor.

Wow - big surprise.  ::)

Who would Jesus discriminate against or shoot?

Quote from: tower912 on June 16, 2020, 04:06:53 PM
Who would Jesus discriminate against or shoot?

Wait until they find out Jesus had dark skin.

Quote from: tower912 on June 16, 2020, 04:06:53 PM
Who would Jesus discriminate against or shoot?

I wear a WWJS wristband.

Let me give two examples of how it should be done:

1) I live in Florida. I formally requested an absentee ballot because I will be out of the State of Florida on primary election day. The Supervisor of Elections for Indian River County has specific requirements, mandated by the State of Florida, for issuing me a ballot for our primary in August. I have to request an absentee ballot in advance and sign the application. I mail it to the IRC Supervisor of Elections, who authenticates my request and mails me a ballot. I receive my ballot at an out-of-state location, fill it in and mail it back. It is counted.

2) In 1974, I was eligible to vote in the State of Tennessee for the first time. I requested an absentee ballot, which was mailed to me at McCormick Hall. I was instructed by the Davidson County Board of Elections to go to the City of Milwaukee clerk and hand her the application for the ballot. She supervised my vote and I voted safely and secretly. I then put the ballot into an envelope and took the sealed envelope to the Clerk, who notarized it (or whatever a city clerk does) and placed it in a second envelope, after viewing my Tennessee drivers license and certifying that the person voting was, well, me. I then mailed it in and my vote was counted.

In both cases, I have no problem with voting by mail. It is fair and ensures electoral integrity. The most  important part of an election is integrity, which is why the State of Florida fired the Palm Beach County election commissioner after the last election, when Palm Beach County couldn't count ballots. It's also why everyone was so concerned about Russian interference in our last election.

Washington Post notwithstanding, if you really believe Old Man Daley didn't steal votes for Kennedy, I have a bridge between San Francisco and Marin County I can sell cheap. And don't get me started about Texas. P.S. -- I hated Nixon, so this IS NOT partisan!

 ::)

Quote from: Jockey on June 16, 2020, 04:16:46 PM
Wait until they find out Jesus had dark skin.

I find it amusing that Jesus is depicted as a Central European Caucasian. He was a Jewish guy from what is now Israel and certainly was not white.

At St. Sabina's parish in Chicago, Jesus is an African American gentleman with large hands that can hold everyone.

I suspect Jesus is like the apostles in Acts 2:4, where the apostles spoke in multiple languages.  Jesus is Caucasian, Asian, African, Native American, Hispanic, Inuit, male and female.

Quote from: Jockey on June 16, 2020, 04:04:54 PM
Wow - big surprise.  ::)

From the county next to mine. Sounds like somebody to have a beer with, a real wonderful human being.

And he's a "pastor"? Must deliver some heartwarming homilies.

Quote from: MU82 on June 16, 2020, 02:19:47 PM
The black EMT executed by cops serving a no-knock warrant in Louisville, the black church-goers executed by a white supremacist in Charleston, or any of the thousands upon thousands of innocent black folks killed, harassed or discriminated against solely because of the color of their skin ... I'm sure it's of great solace to their families to know how "massively successful" they could have become.

Meanwhile, "reverse racism" just keeps holding down us white men. Woe is us!

Oh, and absolutely ... those of us who want America to be better for all inhabitants, we obviously "hate our own country." It's kind of like those who want MU basketball to be better obviously "hate" Marquette basketball.

Thanks, Ners. It's nice when you stop by to give your fellow Scoopers the honor of getting lectured on race relations by a racist.

You didn't logically answer any of the questions I posed. Just deflect, deflect, deflect, and then resort to the intellectually weak, standard playbook, of calling someone "racist."

And yea many liberals essentially do hate America. It's a nonstop b*tchfest But hey, carry on and wallow in your angst and hypocrisy. #resist

And btw, "thousands of deaths" of blacks are not perpetrated by whites. Black on black homicide is exponentially higher than interracial. 

America elected a Black President despite Blacks comprising just 13% of the population. So, suggesting America is so racist and oppressive toward Blacks 2008 onward is illogical.  Maybe if you pound it into Blacks heads over and over and over again how racist and oppressive the "system" is, they will eventually believe it and give up. That's ultimately what your narrative pushes and ironically suppresses the progress and success of Blacks.

Quote from: Jockey on June 16, 2020, 04:02:18 PM

No they don't, but the seeds have finally been planted and watered.

I'm thinking insignificant change.    I'd suggest racism is a spectrum.  A third of the country are pretty evolved, a third of the country have deep ties to their whiteness (or whatever it should be called.)

So the question is .. to what extent did the protests move the reachable third?   Some.  It moved them some.  They are more sensitive.   It bumped that group 1-10 spots to the left -- and some a few spots to the right because law and order, riots, burning, etc.


Net net, some.  Not a sea change by any stretch.

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 07:47:29 PM
You didn't logically answer any of the questions I posed. Just deflect, deflect, deflect, and then resort to the intellectually weak, standard playbook, of calling someone "racist."

And yea many liberals essentially do hate America. It's a nonstop b*tchfest But hey, carry on and wallow in your angst and hypocrisy. #resist

And btw, "thousands of deaths" of blacks are not perpetrated by whites. Black on black homicide is exponentially higher than interracial. 

America elected a Black President despite Blacks comprising just 13% of the population. So, suggesting America is so racist and oppressive toward Blacks 2008 onward is illogical.  Maybe if you pound it into Blacks heads over and over and over again how racist and oppressive the "system" is, they will eventually believe it and give up. That's ultimately what your narrative pushes and ironically suppresses the progress and success of Blacks.

I liked you better when it was only your basketball thoughts were looney.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 16, 2020, 02:31:59 PM
This is way off topic, but so is the rest of this thread ... Remember the black federal agent killed during George Floyd protests in Oakland and held up as an example of BLM violence?
Turns out he was killed by a right-wing extremists.
What's really scary is that one of these guys is active duty military.

Bennett said evidence developed in the case showed communication between Carrillo and others talking about using the George Floyd demonstration planned for Oakland that night as a cover to kill Underwood and wound his partner.
"We believe Carrillo and Justice chose this date because of the planned protest in Oakland," Bennett said. "It provided them to target multiple law enforcement personnel and to avoid apprehension due to the large crowds attending the demonstrations. As described in detail in the complaint, we believe Justice drove the white van."

https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2020/06/16/steven-carrillo-david-underwood-murder-santa-cruz-deputy-fatal-shooting-fatal-oakland-federal-building-shooting/

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1272987008047239169?s=19

Quote from: mu_hilltopper on June 16, 2020, 07:53:26 PM

I'm thinking insignificant change.    I'd suggest racism is a spectrum.  A third of the country are pretty evolved, a third of the country have deep ties to their whiteness (or whatever it should be called.)

So the question is .. to what extent did the protests move the reachable third?   Some.  It moved them some.  They are more sensitive.   It bumped that group 1-10 spots to the left -- and some a few spots to the right because law and order, riots, burning, etc.


Net net, some.  Not a sea change by any stretch.

.
I think the shift has been more significant.
In 2016, 27 percent of Americans supported BLM. Today, 56 percent do.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/502267-support-for-black-lives-matter-doubles-since-2016-poll

In 2014, 43 percent said the killing of black citizens by police was symptomatic of a broader problem.  Today, 69 percent think so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/powerup/2020/06/09/powerup-there-s-been-a-dramatic-shift-in-public-opinion-over-police-treatment-of-black-americans/5edef042602ff129

In 2016, 29 percent said it is OK for NFL players to kneel during the anthem. Today, 52 percent support it.

https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2020/06/14/change-of-heart-most-americans-now-agree-with-kaepernicks-protest-poll/

These are all pretty massive shifts in public opinion.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 16, 2020, 08:45:41 PM
.
I think the shift has been more significant.
In 2016, 27 percent of Americans supported BLM. Today, 56 percent do.

In 2014, 43 percent said the killing of black citizens by police was symptomatic of a broader problem.  Today, 69 percent think so.

In 2016, 29 percent said it is OK for NFL players to kneel during the anthem. Today, 52 percent support it.

I think what I'd counter with is .. there's a difference between "supporting" BLM, kneeling, police issues .. and the explicit and casual prejudice that people have in their hearts and minds.


(Additionally .. in 2016, we found out many people lie to pollsters instead of stating their politically incorrect opinions.)

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 07:47:29 PM
You didn't logically answer any of the questions I posed. Just deflect, deflect, deflect, and then resort to the intellectually weak, standard playbook, of calling someone "racist."

And yea many liberals essentially do hate America. It's a nonstop b*tchfest But hey, carry on and wallow in your angst and hypocrisy. #resist

And btw, "thousands of deaths" of blacks are not perpetrated by whites. Black on black homicide is exponentially higher than interracial. 

America elected a Black President despite Blacks comprising just 13% of the population. So, suggesting America is so racist and oppressive toward Blacks 2008 onward is illogical.  Maybe if you pound it into Blacks heads over and over and over again how racist and oppressive the "system" is, they will eventually believe it and give up. That's ultimately what your narrative pushes and ironically suppresses the progress and success of Blacks.

Racist:

I didn't say thousands of deaths. I said "thousands upon thousands of innocent black folks killed, harassed or discriminated against solely because of the color of their skin."

1. So in addition to being a racist, you're a liar. You can't make a cogent argument, so you lie about the point you're trying to dispute.

2. Do you dispute that thousands upon thousands of innocent black folks have been killed, harassed or discriminated against solely because of the color of their skin?

3. Did saying that prove I hate America?

4. Why do you hate Marquette basketball? It's a nonstop b*tchfest about the coaching with you. But hey, carry on and wallow in your angst and hypocrisy. #resistwojo

I feel sad for you. Racism is a sickness that is very difficult to cure, but I do urge you to seek help. Or, every time a cop or a vigilante or a white supremacist kills a black person, you simply can shrug and say, "Racism in America was cured the day Obama was elected. And hey, at least it wasn't black-on-black crime."

Quote from: Pakuni on June 16, 2020, 08:45:41 PM
.
I think the shift has been more significant.
In 2016, 27 percent of Americans supported BLM. Today, 56 percent do.

https://thehill.com/homenews/news/502267-support-for-black-lives-matter-doubles-since-2016-poll

In 2014, 43 percent said the killing of black citizens by police was symptomatic of a broader problem.  Today, 69 percent think so.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/paloma/powerup/2020/06/09/powerup-there-s-been-a-dramatic-shift-in-public-opinion-over-police-treatment-of-black-americans/5edef042602ff129

In 2016, 29 percent said it is OK for NFL players to kneel during the anthem. Today, 52 percent support it.

https://www.wsls.com/news/local/2020/06/14/change-of-heart-most-americans-now-agree-with-kaepernicks-protest-poll/

These are all pretty massive shifts in public opinion.

Public opinion has indeed changed. Lots of reasons. The George Floyd case being an unambiguous videotaped murder heads the list. Also, I'd like to think there has been a lot of dialogue in the last 4 years that has help advance the movement. Fair or not, elements of BLM marching and chanting "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" and "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want 'em? Now!" and Colin Kapernick sporting the cops as pigs socks at practice hurt a great deal initially.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 16, 2020, 10:19:56 PM
Public opinion has indeed changed. Lots of reasons. The George Floyd case being an unambiguous videotaped murder heads the list. Also, I'd like to think there has been a lot of dialogue in the last 4 years that has help advance the movement. Fair or not, elements of BLM marching and chanting "Pigs in a blanket, fry 'em like bacon" and "What do we want? Dead cops! When do we want 'em? Now!" And Colin Kapernick sporting the cops as pigs socks at practice hurt a a great deal initially.

Socks. We're still talking about a pair of socks. Four years later. Socks. With cartoon piggies on them.
How small would a person have to be to rationalize turning a blind eye to injustice because of a pair of socks?
On the one hand, we have hundreds of years of state-sponsored discrimination and mistreatment based on skin color.
On the other, we have cartoon socks.
I can see how some are conflicted.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 16, 2020, 10:49:44 PM
Socks. We're still talking about a pair of socks. Four years later. Socks. With cartoon piggies on them.
How small would a person have to be to rationalize turning a blind eye to injustice because of a pair of socks?
On the one hand, we have hundreds of years of state-sponsored discrimination and mistreatment based on skin color.
On the other, we have cartoon socks.
I can see how some are conflicted.

Pakuni

We're not "still talking about socks", we're contrasting attitudes from today and 4 years ago towards BLM and the leader of the NFL protests. Like it or not, calling for the death of cops and Kapernick wearing "pig socks" had something to do with people's opinions 4 years ago. Today, not so much.

I think you are both right.  4 years ago, not as many people were ready to hear what CK was really saying.   So it became about the socks (in bad taste, but ultimately trivial), about how he was actually disrespecting the flag and veterans. (Poppycock, if you actually took the time to listen to him)

After three high profile events when most of the society is in some version of lockdown and have time to actually see the videos and contemplate them, more are open to hearing the message.

I only hope the sea change and heart change take root and become permanent.  I would be disappointed if this is just another fad.

Quote from: tower912 on June 17, 2020, 07:31:43 AM
I think you are both right.  4 years ago, not as many people were ready to hear what CK was really saying.   So it became about the socks (in bad taste, but ultimately trivial), about how he was actually disrespecting the flag and veterans. (Poppycock, if you actually took the time to listen to him)

After three high profile events when most of the society is in some version of lockdown and have time to actually see the videos and contemplate them, more are open to hearing the message.

I only hope the sea change and heart change take root and become permanent.  I would be disappointed if this is just another fad.

Tower

I share your hope.

Quote from: tower912 on June 17, 2020, 07:31:43 AM
I think you are both right.  4 years ago, not as many people were ready to hear what CK was really saying.   So it became about the socks (in bad taste, but ultimately trivial), about how he was actually disrespecting the flag and veterans. (Poppycock, if you actually took the time to listen to him)

After three high profile events when most of the society is in some version of lockdown and have time to actually see the videos and contemplate them, more are open to hearing the message.

I only hope the sea change and heart change take root and become permanent.  I would be disappointed if this is just another fad.

I agree totally with this, tower.

In 2016, Kaepernick was immature and was a very imperfect face of the movement. The socks did matter, serving to delegitimize him and his cause. And there certainly were not enough "regular Americans" ready to join him because it wasn't seen as "bad enough" yet - or even bad at all.

He has grown, and the movement has grown exponentially. It has made my heart swell with American pride to see so many suburban white people join our black brothers and sisters - and even organize rallies - in support of eliminating policy brutality and racial inequality.

The situation seems totally different now. Kaepernick does not have to be a lone voice screaming at people who put their fingers in their ears and chant "la la la la I can't hear you, you kneeling commie."

Even the "law and order" president - who has openly encouraged police brutality and who threatens to use military force against peaceful protesters - just signed an executive order aimed at reducing police brutality. That it actually "does" little or nothing is besides the point; it's an effort from somebody who not only had refused to do anything about the cancer of police violence against black people but who had helped metastasize the cancer. It's a teeny, tiny step of progress.

Miles to go. Black Lives Matter. We Are Marquette!

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 17, 2020, 06:47:22 AM
Pakuni

We're not "still talking about socks", we're contrasting attitudes from today and 4 years ago towards BLM and the leader of the NFL protests. Like it or not, calling for the death of cops and Kapernick wearing "pig socks" had something to do with people's opinions 4 years ago. Today, not so much.

Well, we are still talking about socks. Literally.

But the point is the same now and in 2016. Nobody truly opposed to racial inequality or police brutality is going to set aside those principles over a pair of cartoon socks. Either you believe the cause is just or you don't. Anyone who thought "Colin Kaepernick speaks the truth, but those socks ..." is just rationalizing.
If your point is that Kaepernick is an imperfect messenger, fine. You're completely correct on that. All messengers are imperfect. If you only support just causes when they're raised by the perfect, you support nothing.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 17, 2020, 08:37:43 AM
Well, we are still talking about socks. Literally.

But the point is the same now and in 2016. Nobody truly opposed to racial inequality or police brutality is going to set aside those principles over a pair of cartoon socks. Either you believe the cause is just or you don't. Anyone who thought "Colin Kaepernick speaks the truth, but those socks ..." is just rationalizing.
If your point is that Kaepernick is an imperfect messenger, fine. You're completely correct on that. All messengers are imperfect. If you only support just causes when they're raised by the perfect, you support nothing.

You continue to misconstrue my point. The topic I thought we were discussing was why BLM is viewed more favorably in 2020 than it was in 2016. I gave several reasons why I think BLM stumbled with public opinion early. Among them were calling for the death of police officers in some of their marches and a leader who chose cops as pigs socks as a vehicle to promote his message. You're perfectly free to conclude that people interested in the problem shouldn't be sidetracked by imperfect messaging or messengers. I would generally agree.  But the fact is messaging and messengers matter to a lot of people.

Anyone catch Dave Chappelles newest?

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 17, 2020, 12:24:24 PM
You continue to misconstrue my point. The topic I thought we were discussing was why BLM is viewed more favorably in 2020 than it was in 2016. I gave several reasons why I think BLM stumbled with public opinion early. Among them were calling for the death of police officers in some of their marches and a leader who chose cops as pigs socks as a vehicle to promote his message. You're perfectly free to conclude that people interested in the problem shouldn't be sidetracked by imperfect messaging or messengers. I would generally agree.  But the fact is messaging and messengers matter to a lot of people.

I don't think I'm misconstruing your point. I understand what you're saying. I just don't find it likely.
I have hard time believing that someone would be sincere in their desire to end racial injustice and police brutality, but dismiss all that over a pair of socks. A person who does that is either lying about how troubled they really are by those injustices or has a truly messed up set or priorities. For most, I suspect it's the former. The socks were used in 2016 by those wishing not to deal with the injustice in the same way the riots have been used in 2020 by those who don't want to deal with the injustice.
I guess what I'm saying is that I don't believe willing allies to the cause became something other than allies because of a pair of socks. They were never willing allies in the first place. The socks are merely their justification.
You disagree, and that's OK.

Let me try to take this from a non-"progressive" standpoint for a moment and see if we can find some common ground.

1) As Americans, both Republicans and Democrats abhor the beating of George Floyd, the death of Laquan McDonald and others who have died because of unwarranted police brutality. No matter how conservative one might be, we all were sickened by what we saw in Minneapolis.

2) We applaud the fact that the police officer who assaulted Mr. Floyd was taken into custody, charged and will be given a fair trial at the hands of Minnesota justice. If convicted, we expect and even demand an appropriate punishment.

3) We are pleased that the police officers who, despite their training, stood by and did not stop assault on Mr. Floyd, are no longer police officers.

4) We stand with those who want our police officers to be accountable to our communities and who want our police officers to protect us, not assault and kill us. We favor use of deadly force, both physical and through use of a firearm, as a last resort.

5) Those of us who are not politically "progressive" also believe in equal treatment under law, regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or other individually defining value. We know we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go.

6) We want to be part of the solution. For many of us, that means investing in education, ensuring every qualified student has an opportunity for college or technical training and that our workplaces are open to people of talent who have the capability, drive and ingenuity to make more money for our owners and investors.

7) We want people to vote. But we expect integrity within the electoral system.

The disagreement is not in the concepts. It's in the details!

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 17, 2020, 04:51:28 PM
Let me try to take this from a non-"progressive" standpoint for a moment and see if we can find some common ground.

1) As Americans, both Republicans and Democrats abhor the beating of George Floyd, the death of Laquan McDonald and others who have died because of unwarranted police brutality. No matter how conservative one might be, we all were sickened by what we saw in Minneapolis.

2) We applaud the fact that the police officer who assaulted Mr. Floyd was taken into custody, charged and will be given a fair trial at the hands of Minnesota justice. If convicted, we expect and even demand an appropriate punishment.

3) We are pleased that the police officers who, despite their training, stood by and did not stop assault on Mr. Floyd, are no longer police officers.

4) We stand with those who want our police officers to be accountable to our communities and who want our police officers to protect us, not assault and kill us. We favor use of deadly force, both physical and through use of a firearm, as a last resort.

5) Those of us who are not politically "progressive" also believe in equal treatment under law, regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or other individually defining value. We know we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go.

6) We want to be part of the solution. For many of us, that means investing in education, ensuring every qualified student has an opportunity for college or technical training and that our workplaces are open to people of talent who have the capability, drive and ingenuity to make more money for our owners and investors.

7) We want people to vote. But we expect integrity within the electoral system.

The disagreement is not in the concepts. It's in the details!

But where is the systemic change that needs to occur?

We can't play the status quo game that has gotten us where we are today.  Platitudes like, "we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go".  Substantive change matters, and the time for lip service is at an end.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 17, 2020, 05:08:56 PM
But where is the systemic change that needs to occur?

We can't play the status quo game that has gotten us where we are today.  Platitudes like, "we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go".  Substantive change matters, and the time for lip service is at an end.

Yep, this right here is the disconnect. Thus could be lack of interest, lack of empathy, or lack of experience (experience is a cure for ignorance) with the topic.....police brutality and racial profiling are mere symptoms of something much bigger that has gone on a very long time.

dg: I appreciate your tone and I got a lot out of what you said.

My main nit is with No. 6: Those of us who are not politically "progressive" also believe in equal treatment under law, regardless of race, religion, national origin, sexual orientation or other individually defining value. We know we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go.

I do not believe that most conservatives agree about the sexual orientation part of that. The current administration and all of his enablers in Congress have tried everything possible to make life unequal for LGBT folks. Trump pushed a cruel, anti-transgender executive order just a few days ago, and not a single Republican in either house objected to it. I believe a great cry of anger went out in "not politically progressive" America when yesterday's SCOTUS decision was revealed.

Trump also tried to ban all Muslims from entering the country, and his tens of millions of supporters applauded him for it, so I also am not sure about the religion part of your statement.

Not long ago, I put an article on the site about an obviously racist NC state rep. The thing that struck me was that he was elected and then re-elected 3 times. So there are a whole lot of non-progressives who definitely don't believe in equal treatment regardless of race.

I do agree we're working toward getting things right as a nation. It has taken too long, and the steps now are baby steps. But I'm still encouraged by what I see - even though it's a shame that it took evil cops and then protests, often violent ones, to get us even this far.

You know, when the protests turned violent, the knee-jerk reaction was easy: "We agree that these black deaths at the hands of cops have to stop, but protest peacefully please! Don't riot!" It's the easy thing to say, very easy to agree with. I mean, who wants to support violence?

But maybe we don't get where we are today without that violence. Maybe Trump doesn't do his executive order yesterday, maybe the Senate doesn't have its discussion today, maybe the NC statehouse doesn't pass a criminal reform bill today, without the violence.

I don't know that's the case, but I wouldn't doubt it. These are interesting times, and it will be fascinating to see what history says about it years from now.

Again, thanks for those very nice sentiments you expressed. You made Scoop better!

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 17, 2020, 05:08:56 PM
But where is the systemic change that needs to occur?

We can't play the status quo game that has gotten us where we are today.  Platitudes like, "we have made a lot of progress in the last 56 years but we also know we have a long way to go".  Substantive change matters, and the time for lip service is at an end.

OK, we aren't perfect, as anyone with a brain would admit. But where we are today versus where we were 55 years ago is nothing short of amazing. We've gone from not allowing African Americans to eat, ride, sleep, marry or otherwise co-mingle with Caucasians to an African-American President, a majority of our major cities in the United States are either majority governed or predominantly governed by African Americans and we've outdone every other major country in the world with race problems in desegregating.

It's not fast enough, but the question now is, what do you think can be accomplished as a consequence of these incidents? The police issues need to be dealt with, as they did in the 1960s. But think of what we have done:

Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Amendments
Voting Rights Act of 1964 and Amendments
Public Accommodations Act of 1965
Fair Housing Act of 1968
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Community Reinvestment Act of 1974

We've also created special housing programs to allow home ownership to low and moderate income individuals in addition to massive housing construction and subsidies. We have spent trillions on nutrition, education, social services and health to ensure that people have a path out of poverty. Most reasonable employers have diversity and inclusion programs that cover every conceivable protected class of person. We've outlawed hate speech (probably in violation of the First Amendment but for a good cause) and created a special category of hate crimes.

The problem is less in our laws and regulation and more in our hearts and minds. Protesting is good because it brings discrimination to the forefront, but the question is what we need to do as a nation that's concrete and not abstract!

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 17, 2020, 04:51:28 PM
Let me try to take this from a non-"progressive" standpoint for a moment and see if we can find some common ground.

dgies ... I have zero doubt you believe in all of the things you listed. And I believe many/a majority of conservatives/Republicans do as well.
But I have fair less faith than you that these beliefs are universal. We see evidence to the contrary every single day. One need only look to the reaction to the Bostick ruling yesterday to see that there remain plenty of people in this country who don't believe in "equal treatment under law" for all.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 17, 2020, 06:33:16 PM
OK, we aren't perfect, as anyone with a brain would admit. But where we are today versus where we were 55 years ago is nothing short of amazing. We've gone from not allowing African Americans to eat, ride, sleep, marry or otherwise co-mingle with Caucasians to an African-American President, a majority of our major cities in the United States are either majority governed or predominantly governed by African Americans and we've outdone every other major country in the world with race problems in desegregating.

It's not fast enough, but the question now is, what do you think can be accomplished as a consequence of these incidents? The police issues need to be dealt with, as they did in the 1960s. But think of what we have done:

Civil Rights Act of 1964 and Amendments
Voting Rights Act of 1964 and Amendments
Public Accommodations Act of 1965
Fair Housing Act of 1968
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Community Reinvestment Act of 1974

We've also created special housing programs to allow home ownership to low and moderate income individuals in addition to massive housing construction and subsidies. We have spent trillions on nutrition, education, social services and health to ensure that people have a path out of poverty. Most reasonable employers have diversity and inclusion programs that cover every conceivable protected class of person. We've outlawed hate speech (probably in violation of the First Amendment but for a good cause) and created a special category of hate crimes.

The problem is less in our laws and regulation and more in our hearts and minds. Protesting is good because it brings discrimination to the forefront, but the question is what we need to do as a nation that's concrete and not abstract!

So nothing of true substance has changed 46 years.  We did some stuff for a while, and then called it a generation.  There's the problem, that's longer than I've existed on this planet.

Quote from: Elonsmusk on June 16, 2020, 07:47:29 PM
You didn't logically answer any of the questions I posed. Just deflect, deflect, deflect, and then resort to the intellectually weak, standard playbook, of calling someone "racist."

And yea many liberals essentially do hate America. It's a nonstop b*tchfest But hey, carry on and wallow in your angst and hypocrisy. #resist

And btw, "thousands of deaths" of blacks are not perpetrated by whites. Black on black homicide is exponentially higher than interracial. 

America elected a Black President despite Blacks comprising just 13% of the population. So, suggesting America is so racist and oppressive toward Blacks 2008 onward is illogical.  Maybe if you pound it into Blacks heads over and over and over again how racist and oppressive the "system" is, they will eventually believe it and give up. That's ultimately what your narrative pushes and ironically suppresses the progress and success of Blacks.

Rudy Giuliani , that you?

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 17, 2020, 07:27:06 PM
So nothing of true substance has changed 46 years.  We did some stuff for a while, and then called it a generation.  There's the problem, that's longer than I've existed on this planet.

Brother Hards, those are the initiatives. Many of those pieces of legislation have been reauthorized, extended, revised and otherwise adapted to meet contemporary concerns. Also, look at the transfer payments, social service commitments and many other initiatives that are sponsored by both parties in Congress.

The Voting Rights Act, for example, has been reauthorized three times, for 25 years each.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 17, 2020, 09:26:52 PM
Brother Hards, those are the initiatives. Many of those pieces of legislation have been reauthorized, extended, revised and otherwise adapted to meet contemporary concerns. Also, look at the transfer payments, social service commitments and many other initiatives that are sponsored by both parties in Congress.

The Voting Rights Act, for example, has been reauthorized three times, for 25 years each.

Surely you are aware of the Supreme Court ruling that neutered this law arising from a challenge from Alabama?  Hmmm, I wonder what their intentions were? 

https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/how-shelby-county-broke-america/564707/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2018/07/how-shelby-county-broke-america/564707/)

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 17, 2020, 09:26:52 PM
Brother Hards, those are the initiatives. Many of those pieces of legislation have been reauthorized, extended, revised and otherwise adapted to meet contemporary concerns. Also, look at the transfer payments, social service commitments and many other initiatives that are sponsored by both parties in Congress.

The Voting Rights Act, for example, has been reauthorized three times, for 25 years each.

My point is, we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back.  Maybe this time we try something new and worthwhile.

How many more generations of systemic racism do we need to stare down before we enact tangible change? 

Our judicial, law enforcement, and penal system is totally broken.  Let's start there.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 17, 2020, 10:43:49 PM
My point is, we shouldn't be patting ourselves on the back.  Maybe this time we try something new and worthwhile.

How many more generations of systemic racism do we need to stare down before we enact tangible change? 

Our judicial, law enforcement, and penal system is totally broken.  Let's start there.

this would be a fantastic start to an interview with CNN or MSNBC.  otherwise, it's all blah blah blah blah

the term "systemic racism" is a head turner. why is it being used more indiscriminately today then say the previous 11 years?  unless i'm not in full understanding of what effect people using it want to evoke, it is an inflammatory "buzz" word. first of all, i don't think 2 people who use the term could come to agreement on what exactly this means.  how do you measure its levels or extensivity?  when will we know it is being remedied?  we have a system that has shown much progress over the past 60 years.  is it perfect or is it complete? no, but to burn down and steal peoples belongings is only emblematic of the problems we fail to address.  bad behavior.   

  "try something new and worthwhile"  ??

  these big cities have been run by umm, you guys for like, generations and they still haven't addressed the rising murder rates, illiteracy, lack of respect for authority(ask any teacher or principal), rampant drug and alcohol abuse, etc etc .  if we had some honest people, they'd be addressing the real problems rather than allowing mob rule distract from them and use some vague, astute sounding sociological term.  but when people try to be honest, they get shout down, beat down and burnt down.  no body is ever at fault personally.   appeasement sure in the hell doesn't work

  how about trying school choice for one? 


one thing that could be instituted and better managed is a peer revue system for cops.  maybe they already have it, but as we've found out, it would be in everyone's best interest to take, once again, an honest look at it and institute some kind of point system or something to get rid of bad cops.   too many things such as this are decided by "who ya know".  in other words, politics 

to get rid of or defund the police is one of the biggest knee jerk and short sighted group think jokes i've ever heard.  do we disband the FBI because of some bad cops at the top?  the people who would be most hurt by disbanding our police will be those who most need it; complete anarchy will quickly fill that vacuum. 

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 18, 2020, 07:03:36 AM
this would be a fantastic start to an interview with CNN or MSNBC.  otherwise, it's all blah blah blah blah

the term "systemic racism" is a head turner. why is it being used more indiscriminately today then say the previous 11 years?  unless i'm not in full understanding of what effect people using it want to evoke, it is an inflammatory "buzz" word. first of all, i don't think 2 people who use the term could come to agreement on what exactly this means.  how do you measure its levels or extensivity?  when will we know it is being remedied?  we have a system that has shown much progress over the past 60 years.  is it perfect or is it complete? no, but to burn down and steal peoples belongings is only emblematic of the problems we fail to address.  bad behavior.   

  "try something new and worthwhile"  ??

  these big cities have been run by umm, you guys for like, generations and they still haven't addressed the rising murder rates, illiteracy, lack of respect for authority(ask any teacher or principal), rampant drug and alcohol abuse, etc etc .  if we had some honest people, they'd be addressing the real problems rather than allowing mob rule distract from them and use some vague, astute sounding sociological term.  but when people try to be honest, they get shout down, beat down and burnt down.  no body is ever at fault personally.   appeasement sure in the hell doesn't work

  how about trying school choice for one? 


one thing that could be instituted and better managed is a peer revue system for cops.  maybe they already have it, but as we've found out, it would be in everyone's best interest to take, once again, an honest look at it and institute some kind of point system or something to get rid of bad cops.   too many things such as this are decided by "who ya know".  in other words, politics 

to get rid of or defund the police is one of the biggest knee jerk and short sighted group think jokes i've ever heard.  do we disband the FBI because of some bad cops at the top?  the people who would be most hurt by disbanding our police will be those who most need it; complete anarchy will quickly fill that vacuum.

Source?

Is there not lack of respect for authority in well-to-do suburb/rural white schools? I personally know this happens


What are the real problems?

Mostly agreed

You need to seriously educate on what refund the police means. Start with Camden, NJ

https://krdo.com/news/national-world/2020/06/17/atlanta-police-officers-not-answering-some-911-calls-after-former-cop-charged-with-murder-sources-say/

That's messed up.

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 18, 2020, 07:03:36 AM
this would be a fantastic start to an interview with CNN or MSNBC.  otherwise, it's all blah blah blah blah

the term "systemic racism" is a head turner. why is it being used more indiscriminately today then say the previous 11 years?  unless i'm not in full understanding of what effect people using it want to evoke, it is an inflammatory "buzz" word. first of all, i don't think 2 people who use the term could come to agreement on what exactly this means.  how do you measure its levels or extensivity?  when will we know it is being remedied?  we have a system that has shown much progress over the past 60 years.  is it perfect or is it complete? no, but to burn down and steal peoples belongings is only emblematic of the problems we fail to address.  bad behavior.   

  "try something new and worthwhile"  ??

  these big cities have been run by umm, you guys for like, generations and they still haven't addressed the rising murder rates, illiteracy, lack of respect for authority(ask any teacher or principal), rampant drug and alcohol abuse, etc etc .  if we had some honest people, they'd be addressing the real problems rather than allowing mob rule distract from them and use some vague, astute sounding sociological term.  but when people try to be honest, they get shout down, beat down and burnt down.  no body is ever at fault personally.   appeasement sure in the hell doesn't work

  how about trying school choice for one? 


one thing that could be instituted and better managed is a peer revue system for cops.  maybe they already have it, but as we've found out, it would be in everyone's best interest to take, once again, an honest look at it and institute some kind of point system or something to get rid of bad cops.   too many things such as this are decided by "who ya know".  in other words, politics 

to get rid of or defund the police is one of the biggest knee jerk and short sighted group think jokes i've ever heard.  do we disband the FBI because of some bad cops at the top?  the people who would be most hurt by disbanding our police will be those who most need it; complete anarchy will quickly fill that vacuum.

You really need to get outside your bubble and educate yourself about:

1.  Systemic racism
2.  The canard that cities are the cesspools of murder, illiteracy, and rampant drug use
3.  What defunding the police is... because you'd probably agree with it.

I don't have the time or energy to educate people about these topics if can't be bothered to attempt to understand the concepts.

So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining.

Pesky southern state with strong union protection.


Defunding the police isn't the answer, IMO.   Adequately funding social services and mental health needs to happen.   Neglected for years.

I am not a zero sum person.   I am a both/and type.

Only tangently related, 90 degrees today and the fire station has no AC.   Our Central AC unit, installed in 1987, croaked this week.   The taxpayers got their money's worth out of it.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 18, 2020, 07:47:29 AM
You really need to get outside your bubble and educate yourself about:

1.  Systemic racism
2.  The canard that cities are the cesspools of murder, illiteracy, and rampant drug use
3.  What defunding the police is... because you'd probably agree with it.

I don't have the time or energy to educate people about these topics if can't be bothered to attempt to understand the concepts.

So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining.

Also educate yourself about who is doing some of the rioting, looting and burning.  It isn't simply protestors.  There are anarchists, right wing extremists and other everyday people who simply want stuff, taking advantage of the situation.  Some who want to undermine and delegitimize the movement.

The looting and burning down of fast food restuarants, etc. is undoubtedly awful.  But don't let it take your eyes away from the more important problems we are dealing with.  This and the legal history of George Floyd, et. al. shouldn't become the "pig socks" of this moment.  It shouldn't be used as an excuse to do nothing.

Don't be distracted.

Quote from: tower912 on June 18, 2020, 07:50:30 AM
Defunding the police isn't the answer, IMO.   Adequately funding social services and mental health needs to happen.   Neglected for years.

Yes.  "Defund the police" is a bad phrase.  Reform it.  De-militarize it.  Don't defund it.  We need good, well paid police offcers who make a difference in their communities.

Quote from: tower912 on June 18, 2020, 07:50:30 AM
Pesky southern state with strong union protection.


Defunding the police isn't the answer, IMO.   Adequately funding social services and mental health needs to happen.   Neglected for years.

I am not a zero sum person.   I am a both/and type.

Only tangently related, 90 degrees today and the fire station has no AC.   Our Central AC unit, installed in 1987, croaked this week.   The taxpayers got their money's worth out of it.

You do the first sentence by doing the second sentence.

Police are used too often in our society.  Their jobs are too large and used as a catch all.  And this is where we run into problems.  They have to deal with all the ills of society and aren't adequately trained for it.  Plus... anyone can be a cop.  The average kid sitting next to you who screwed around in high school?  He can be a cop. 

agree on both counts Fluffy

Fluffy, I understand that taking (for example) $10 million out of the police budget and reallocating it to social work and mental health IS the central theme of defunding the police.  (As opposed to those who just want to use it as a demagoguing sound bite)

My argument is both/and.

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 18, 2020, 07:47:29 AM
You really need to get outside your bubble and educate yourself about:

1.  Systemic racism
2.  The canard that cities are the cesspools of murder, illiteracy, and rampant drug use
3.  What defunding the police is... because you'd probably agree with it.

This.
To hear it from some Scoopers, America's cities are on par with mid-80s Beirut.

Our cities are our economic engines

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 18, 2020, 07:03:36 AM
the term "systemic racism" is a head turner. why is it being used more indiscriminately today then say the previous 11 years?  unless i'm not in full understanding of what effect people using it want to evoke, it is an inflammatory "buzz" word. first of all, i don't think 2 people who use the term could come to agreement on what exactly this means.  how do you measure its levels or extensivity?  when will we know it is being remedied?  we have a system that has shown much progress over the past 60 years.  is it perfect or is it complete? no, but to burn down and steal peoples belongings is only emblematic of the problems we fail to address.  bad behavior.   

  "try something new and worthwhile"  ??

Why are people talking more about systemic racism today? Because video evidence caught white cops murdering innocent black people in cold blood, prompting fed-up black folks to take part in protests, some of which turned violent. All of which got everybody talking about all things relating to race, and even got some people in power trying to do something about it. There's more media, especially social media, than ever before, too, so it amplifies the conversation. Today, every man, woman and child with a smartphone is a "reporter." That's why there's more discussion of systemic racism today than, say, the previous 11 years.

As for your apparent disdain or inability to understand what systemic racism is ...

I think most would say it is when the majority race in a society uses discrimination in criminal justice, housing, health care, political policy-setting, employment, education, etc, to keep minority races down. Many (most?) black people in America have been subject to all of that, and it simply doesn't happen in White America. For example, by and large, a white person who is stopped with a broken tail-light is not likely to be told by a white cop to get out of the car, searched illegally, forced to spread-eagle against the car, and beaten if he says a word. Hence, the racism is built into the system, and it's certainly built into policing.

The matter-of-fact brutality in the Floyd case has made even people like you go, "Whoa, that was bad." Of course, had it not been caught on video, you would have believed Chauvin if he had said Floyd tried to kill him; after all, his 3 buddies would have been eyewitnesses and backed up whatever account was necessary to let their pal get away with murder. You wouldn't have even given a 1% possibility to the notion that Floyd was the victim and the cops were bad. That casual dismissal of the black man's rights also would be an example of systemic racism. I wonder how many cops have gotten away with dozens ... hundreds ... thousands of similar situations over the last few decades because there was no video evidence to hold the cops accountable. Another example of systemic racism. Chauvin had a history of racism and violence, yet he kept his job, which made it possible for him to murder Floyd. More systemic racism.

You don't like the term "systemic racism"? Cool. You don't have to use it. But if you don't understand why the conversation is advancing now, why black people and those who believe black lives matter have gotten so fed up that they are doing what they are doing, you are even more blind than your posts on the subject suggest.

Unfortunately, it took a near race riot to get us white folks out of our comfortable, suburban, gated bubbles ... even if it's mostly to say, "Chauvin was bad, but rioting is just as bad if not worse," like some Scoopers have done.

Hell, even your emperor - who 2 weeks ago used his militia to attack peaceful protesters so he could stage a photo-op - is actually trying to listen to black people. What he's proposing is window dressing, and it's hard to take him seriously given his decades of racist words and deeds, but at least he's pretending to try. You might do at least that much.

Us white folks might want to heed the very wise words of a very young white man, Clemson QB Trevor Lawrence:

"There has to be a shift in the way of thinking. Rational must outweigh irrational. Justice must outweigh injustice. Love must outweigh hate. If you put yourself in someone else's shoes and you don't like how it feels - that's when you know things need to change. I'm siding with my brothers that deal, and continuously deal, with things I will never experience. The injustice is clear ... and so is the hate. It can no longer be explained away. If you're still 'explaining' it - check your heart and ask why."

He went on to say he didn't give a shyte if he or Clemson loses fans because of what he says and does in the fight for racial equality.

"It's important for us to stand up for something. It's easy to stay quiet because some people don't want to make people mad. But my thoughts on it are: Those aren't the kind of fans, followers, whatever that you want, if it makes them mad if you stand up for equality."

Effen bravo, young man.

Quote from: Jockey on June 09, 2020, 08:17:04 PM
Make no mistake about it. This will be the trump/republican playbook in November.

Steal the election through voter suppression.  This was not an unexpected outcome today. It is what Republicans have fought for. A continuation of their racist policies when it comes to voting.

Same thing the DNC did on Super Tuesday near college campuses & places that skewed younger.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 18, 2020, 08:54:24 AM
This.
To hear it from some Scoopers, America's cities are on par with mid-80s Beirut.

Well, to be fair, their are many "cities" within a segregated place like Chicago. Englewood and Lincoln Park may technically be just different neighborhoods in the same city But tell that to the folks stuck in the former.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 18, 2020, 03:16:29 PM
Well, to be fair, their are many "cities" within a segregated place like Chicago. Englewood and Lincoln Park may technically be just different neighborhoods in the same city But tell that to the folks stuck in the former.

(https://media3.giphy.com/media/Nl6T837bDWE1DPczq3/giphy.gif)

nm

On a related, the SEC just told Mississippi it won't hold conference championships in the state until it finds itself a new flag.

Not sure how many conference events actually take place in Mississippi, but it's something.

Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on June 18, 2020, 09:01:56 AM
Our cities are our economic engines

It's easy for politicians from rural areas to take shots at big cities, but without their revenue, they'd struggle to pay for a lot of bills.  Imagine Wisconsin without Madison or Milwaukee.  It's South Dakota without the tourist attractions

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 18, 2020, 07:47:29 AM
You really need to get outside your bubble and educate yourself about:

1.  Systemic racism
2.  The canard that cities are the cesspools of murder, illiteracy, and rampant drug use
3.  What defunding the police is... because you'd probably agree with it.

I don't have the time or energy to educate people about these topics if can't be bothered to attempt to understand the concepts.

So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining.

  "get outside of my bubble" ?  educate or indoctrinate?  do the work my eynis!  your #2-the "canard"??  So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  i'm in a bubble?  you guys think you're so smart, sometimes it's best we just hang up and listen... with amazement

   "Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining."

     that's a cute lil phrase ya copied from someone and liked it so much you couldn't wait to try it out here-lame

but back to the "canard"  if you don't think there aren't systemic lawlessness, education and familial issues in the cities, then i'd just be talking to a stump.  the real issue we have is people being honest about what's going on. 

   allowing a group of domestic terrorist unlawfully occupy a portion of a city unlawfully and the mayor and briefly the governor(until his house got vandalized) called it a "festival"??  peaceful?? 

  arresting violent rioters, assaulters and arsonists only to see them walk right out the back doors of the police station without being charged or held?

a dude who has been arrested 104 times assault a 92 year old in plain daylight on the street-is this the systemic racism you speak of?

proficiency tests of major city schools are atrocious in and of themselves...then given the amount of money, downright disgusting and those are what needs to be disbanded, not police departments for Gods sake, but i'm stocking up regardless.  remember-that lock on my door is for their protection, not mine

 

Ah so rocket is going with being distracted and not focusing on the main issues at hand.

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.

Wow

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 18, 2020, 11:57:23 PM
  "get outside of my bubble" ?  educate or indoctrinate?  do the work my eynis!  your #2-the "canard"??  So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  i'm in a bubble?  you guys think you're so smart, sometimes it's best we just hang up and listen... with amazement

   "Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining."

     that's a cute lil phrase ya copied from someone and liked it so much you couldn't wait to try it out here-lame

but back to the "canard"  if you don't think there aren't systemic lawlessness, education and familial issues in the cities, then i'd just be talking to a stump.  the real issue we have is people being honest about what's going on.

   allowing a group of domestic terrorist unlawfully occupy a portion of a city unlawfully and the mayor and briefly the governor(until his house got vandalized) called it a "festival"??  peaceful?? 

  arresting violent rioters, assaulters and arsonists only to see them walk right out the back doors of the police station without being charged or held?

a dude who has been arrested 104 times assault a 92 year old in plain daylight on the street-is this the systemic racism you speak of?

proficiency tests of major city schools are atrocious in and of themselves...then given the amount of money, downright disgusting and those are what needs to be disbanded, not police departments for Gods sake, but i'm stocking up regardless.  remember-that lock on my door is for their protection, not mine

Ah, so you did the exact thing I predicted you'd do.  I'm not suggesting you listen to MSNBC or read the NYT.  I'm suggesting a simple internet search and having you see what pops up.

Here is a great jumping off point.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_strategy

Some day you're going to have to ask yourself uncomfortable questions, or risk being "Juror Ten".

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 18, 2020, 11:57:23 PM
  "get outside of my bubble" ?  educate or indoctrinate?  do the work my eynis!  your #2-the "canard"??  So do the work, and then come and talk about it.  i'm in a bubble?  you guys think you're so smart, sometimes it's best we just hang up and listen... with amazement

   "Because right now, you're pissing into the wind and convinced it's raining."

     that's a cute lil phrase ya copied from someone and liked it so much you couldn't wait to try it out here-lame

but back to the "canard"  if you don't think there aren't systemic lawlessness, education and familial issues in the cities, then i'd just be talking to a stump.  the real issue we have is people being honest about what's going on. 

   allowing a group of domestic terrorist unlawfully occupy a portion of a city unlawfully and the mayor and briefly the governor(until his house got vandalized) called it a "festival"??  peaceful?? 

  arresting violent rioters, assaulters and arsonists only to see them walk right out the back doors of the police station without being charged or held?

a dude who has been arrested 104 times assault a 92 year old in plain daylight on the street-is this the systemic racism you speak of?

proficiency tests of major city schools are atrocious in and of themselves...then given the amount of money, downright disgusting and those are what needs to be disbanded, not police departments for Gods sake, but i'm stocking up regardless.  remember-that lock on my door is for their protection, not mine

Honest question, what was your reaction to the Bundt land dispute? When a horde of, let's say people who like you own guns legally, literally had an armed confrontation with the police?

Quote from: Hards_Alumni on June 19, 2020, 08:37:56 AM
Some day you're going to have to ask yourself uncomfortable questions

Will NEVER happen. Ever.

At the Board's indulgence, may I raise a few points for consideration:

1) Defunding the Police Departments -- Are you people nuts? Change the police, "yes!" Change hiring practices, "yes!" Change use of deadly force policies, "yes!" Define what you want from a police department: ABSOLUTELY! But if society defunds police departments, it is the neighborhoods most riddled by violence and crime that will hurt the most. Plus, this is not as easy as it sounds. Communities have agreements with police unions so defunding the police department may mean older squad cars more prone to breaking down (which means fewer officers on the streets), poorer equipment or inability to develop and implement the programs we want.

2) More social spending -- OK, we've spent trillions nationally to alleviate suffering. The 1965 War on Poverty promulgated by President Lyndon B. Johnson has mushroomed into massive spending on just about everything imaginable. Sure, we have billions in annual spending on social services, but we have seen President Johnson's noble efforts to contain poverty mushroom into massive federal and state bureaucracies. What do those who argue for this think will be different this time? Do you think federal and state bureaucracies will go away? How much of every federal social service dollar do you think would reach those really in need?

If I thought for one minute more government fiscal intervention to alleviate racism, uplift suffering folks and ensure equal opportunity for everyone truly would work, I'd support it in a minute. I truly would. But the fact that we're having these discussions 55 years after the enactment of landmark civil rights laws tells me we have to go in a very different direction.

The courts need to be there. People need to change. But we will not succeed in legislating a change in what's in people's hearts.

The War on Poverty worked. 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2016/08/24/the-war-on-poverty-worked-the-real-us-poverty-rate-is-4-8/#4b2e5c981a38

"Bureaucracy" (in other words "decent paying jobs") is a small price to pay for that.  Furthermore your real, effective tax rate has hardly changed in the meantime.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 09:15:55 AM
At the Board's indulgence, may I raise a few points for consideration:

1) Defunding the Police Departments -- Are you people nuts? Change the police, "yes!" Change hiring practices, "yes!" Change use of deadly force policies, "yes!" Define what you want from a police department: ABSOLUTELY! But if society defunds police departments, it is the neighborhoods most riddled by violence and crime that will hurt the most. Plus, this is not as easy as it sounds. Communities have agreements with police unions so defunding the police department may mean older squad cars more prone to breaking down (which means fewer officers on the streets), poorer equipment or inability to develop and implement the programs we want.

2) More social spending -- OK, we've spent trillions nationally to alleviate suffering. The 1965 War on Poverty promulgated by President Lyndon B. Johnson has mushroomed into massive spending on just about everything imaginable. Sure, we have billions in annual spending on social services, but we have seen President Johnson's noble efforts to contain poverty mushroom into massive federal and state bureaucracies. What do those who argue for this think will be different this time? Do you think federal and state bureaucracies will go away? How much of every federal social service dollar do you think would reach those really in need?

If I thought for one minute more government fiscal intervention to alleviate racism, uplift suffering folks and ensure equal opportunity for everyone truly would work, I'd support it in a minute. I truly would. But the fact that we're having these discussions 55 years after the enactment of landmark civil rights laws tells me we have to go in a very different direction.

The courts need to be there. People need to change. But we will not succeed in legislating a change in what's in people's hearts.

1) I am not for defunding the police -- or at least what most on the right think of when they hear "defund." Nor is Biden. Nor are many Senate or House candidates or governors that I've read about. A few communities might try something extreme, the way Camden NJ did (and, so far at least, VERY SUCCESSFULLY), but it would be very few. For most folks who actually will be running things, the changes will be more akin to what you have talked about. "Defund" probably will end up being a more effective political rallying cry for Republicans than for Democrats.

2) I am not knowledgeable enough on this subject - nor are most Scoopers, I reckon - to come up with concrete dollar figures or exact programs on which to allocate them. I will throw this out there, though: Every time there is a mass murder by a domestic terrorist, the GOP says, "It's a mental health issue, not a gun issue" ... but not only have they avoided allocating more resources to mental health, they often have taken away resources to fund other stuff that matters more to them.

No, my brother, you can't legislate change in people's hearts. And I'd be very interested in hearing about the "different direction" you think we should go.

However, I do think you can make policy that will, at least in small ways, chip away at systemic racism. The First Step Act, which passed in a bipartisan vote and which the Kardashians got Trump to sign, was a good piece of legislation. In NC, laws are being worked on that would change the outrageously unfair bail system now used just about everywhere. (People with money walk, but get those without money get incarcerated, even though they were arrested for the exact same offense.) Many states are trying to change voting laws so that voters of color will not be disenfranchised. And now there is considerable support for the very kind of police reforms you seem to be in favor of.

Stuff like that. One step at a time. Chip away at it.

Haters will always hate. Right here on Scoop, there are those who think "reverse racism" is worse than actual racism, who think Obama's election "proves" there is no systemic racism, who want to avoid even learning about what systemic racism means, etc.

But I do believe there are things we can do as Americans, working together, to help.

Quote from: MU82 on June 19, 2020, 10:06:10 AM
1) I am not for defunding the police -- or at least what most on the right think of when they hear "defund." Nor is Biden. Nor are many Senate or House candidates or governors that I've read about. A few communities might try something extreme, the way Camden NJ did (and, so far at least, VERY SUCCESSFULLY), but it would be very few. For most folks who actually will be running things, the changes will be more akin to what you have talked about. "Defund" probably will end up being a more effective political rallying cry for Republicans than for Democrats.

2) I am not knowledgeable enough on this subject - nor are most Scoopers, I reckon - to come up with concrete dollar figures or exact programs on which to allocate them. I will throw this out there, though: Every time there is a mass murder by a domestic terrorist, the GOP says, "It's a mental health issue, not a gun issue" ... but not only have they avoided allocating more resources to mental health, they often have taken away resources to fund other stuff that matters more to them.

No, my brother, you can't legislate change in people's hearts. And I'd be very interested in hearing about the "different direction" you think we should go.

However, I do think you can make policy that will, at least in small ways, chip away at systemic racism. The First Step Act, which passed in a bipartisan vote and which the Kardashians got Trump to sign, was a good piece of legislation. In NC, laws are being worked on that would change the outrageously unfair bail system now used just about everywhere. (People with money walk, but get those without money get incarcerated, even though they were arrested for the exact same offense.) Many states are trying to change voting laws so that voters of color will not be disenfranchised. And now there is considerable support for the very kind of police reforms you seem to be in favor of.

Stuff like that. One step at a time. Chip away at it.

Haters will always hate. Right here on Scoop, there are those who think "reverse racism" is worse than actual racism, who think Obama's election "proves" there is no systemic racism, who want to avoid even learning about what systemic racism means, etc.

But I do believe there are things we can do as Americans, working together, to help.

Brother MU, you and I are at different points in the political spectrum, but we are not far apart on this. Small moves can make big differences. For example, even in our home, my wife and I one evening after this started raised a series of "what if" questions about race that basically allowed us in our private conversations to explore where we need to change (and both of us are pretty liberal on how we think we should treat each other)

Sample question we discussed: "What if a couple of a different race with teenagers moved into the house next door?" Would we (a) Embrace them, bring them into a close-knit group of friends, have them over for dinner and welcome them into our lives; (b) Be friendly but distant; or, (c) Ignore them and even look for faults. Real question, real life example for some people in our community. Possibly for us in the future.

Another point, here in Chicago (I'm back for the summer and fall) what is our television news saying about the local African American Community? In our house, NBC5 tends to be the news choice (the "Lovely Allison News") at 6 p.m., and 10 p.m. In a 13-14 minute news hole, about 11-12 minutes are shootings, violence, fires, car accidents, robberies and thefts. The Lovely Allison makes her faces and talks about how tragic it is, but here you have a Caucasian woman and her Caucasian partner bringing you the nightly crime report. The vast majority of what they report comes from either the West Side or South Side or the inner-ring suburbs that are often predominantly African-American.

We're addicted to crime news here and our TV producers know it generates viewers. It's also got great visuals and someone can stand out in front of a squad car or nasty crime scene and talk to Police. "It's sooooo sad," says the Lovely Allison as she moves to the next crime story. Maybe we need to rethink TV news as one means of changing the feeling too many people have.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 12:22:57 PM
Brother MU, you and I are at different points in the political spectrum, but we are not far apart on this. Small moves can make big differences. For example, even in our home, my wife and I one evening after this started raised a series of "what if" questions about race that basically allowed us in our private conversations to explore where we need to change (and both of us are pretty liberal on how we think we should treat each other)

Sample question we discussed: "What if a couple of a different race with teenagers moved into the house next door?" Would we (a) Embrace them, bring them into a close-knit group of friends, have them over for dinner and welcome them into our lives; (b) Be friendly but distant; or, (c) Ignore them and even look for faults. Real question, real life example for some people in our community. Possibly for us in the future.

Another point, here in Chicago (I'm back for the summer and fall) what is our television news saying about the local African American Community? In our house, NBC5 tends to be the news choice (the "Lovely Allison News") at 6 p.m., and 10 p.m. In a 13-14 minute news hole, about 11-12 minutes are shootings, violence, fires, car accidents, robberies and thefts. The Lovely Allison makes her faces and talks about how tragic it is, but here you have a Caucasian woman and her Caucasian partner bringing you the nightly crime report. The vast majority of what they report comes from either the West Side or South Side or the inner-ring suburbs that are often predominantly African-American.

We're addicted to crime news here and our TV producers know it generates viewers. It's also got great visuals and someone can stand out in front of a squad car or nasty crime scene and talk to Police. "It's sooooo sad," says the Lovely Allison as she moves to the next crime story. Maybe we need to rethink TV news as one means of changing the feeling too many people have.

I think most Americans agree that something is wrong and that change comes from our youth.  Where a lot of us are different is how we get there, and that is a discussion that I'm willing to have with anyone.  I'm glad that more people are becoming aware of what is going on outside of their 'world'. 

Also, I can't stand to watch the news.  I feel like the crime news angle that many Americans are accustomed to is abhorrent.  I don't find violence on its own very newsworthy.  Unfortunately, I think a lot of people enjoy seeing or hearing about someone who is worse off than they are... and this makes them feel better about their own situation.

"Well, at least I don't live there!"  "Wow, I'm sure glad that I don't hang out with those people!"

It's the same reason people enjoy reality TV.  Tabloid television is alive and well in the ol' US of A.

dg:

Regardless of where I have lived - be it Minneapolis, Chicago or now Charlotte - I have not watched the local news in so long that I can't remember the last time I did. Maybe 1990-something? And it's just for the reasons you state. I don't need to see every fire, every murder and every fluff piece about a cat who whistles. I think there have been surveys that show the main reason people watch local news is for the weather; I guess they've never heard of The Weather Channel. Or the weather app on their smartphone.

Just as we can't legislate people to have good hearts, we can't legislate away all that sucks about local news. First Amendment, and all that. What we can do as consumers is stop watching it. If their ratings get low enough, they either will change or disappear. I've been doing that (or not doing that) for as long as I can remember.

As for the discussion you and your wife had, that's a great idea. Everybody should do it.

Peace, my friend.

I am an imperfect soul.    I strive, I fail.    I have for most of my adult life attempted to do what Reverend King challenged us to do.   To not judge someone based on their skin tone, but instead by the content of their character, their words, and their actions.   

I don't care if you are white, black, Hispanic, Asian, male, female, straight, gay, trans.   

Just don't be an pretty boy.

  ( I have been saying this for years.   My laughing wife shows it to me as a Facebook meme today.   Glad Facebook is catching up to me.)


Don't act entitled.
Remember we are all in this together.  We need each other.
Sitting around complaining when there is work to be done doesn't cut it any more.   
Mythical good old days?    Gone.   And a myth.   Something to be learned from, not worshiped.   We are here now. 
What are you going to do going forward?


Put on a mask.    I am wearing one for your benefit.    Show the same courtesy.   

Quote from: Pakuni on June 18, 2020, 06:52:34 PM
On a related, the SEC just told Mississippi it won't hold conference championships in the state until it finds itself a new flag.

Not sure how many conference events actually take place in Mississippi, but it's something.

in 2019 Mississippi State hosted Baseball and Women's Basketball tourney games. Southern Miss has hosted baseball tourney games as well.

Mississippi isn't getting neutral site games but it will hurt schools who earn the right to host tourney games.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 09:15:55 AM
At the Board's indulgence, may I raise a few points for consideration:

1) Defunding the Police Departments -- Are you people nuts? Change the police, "yes!" Change hiring practices, "yes!" Change use of deadly force policies, "yes!" Define what you want from a police department: ABSOLUTELY! But if society defunds police departments, it is the neighborhoods most riddled by violence and crime that will hurt the most. Plus, this is not as easy as it sounds. Communities have agreements with police unions so defunding the police department may mean older squad cars more prone to breaking down (which means fewer officers on the streets), poorer equipment or inability to develop and implement the programs we want.

"Defund the police" is one of the worst slogans the movement could have come up with. Two weeks ago I went to a rally and listened to the leaders chant "defund the police" (and saw it on signs and spray-painted around downtown) and said to my wife "are they crazy? They want to get rid of the police?" My wife, as a minority, is a little more tuned into the movement and said: "they don't want to completely take away funding, just reallocate funding" and I read up on what it meant. The fact it had to be explained to someone highly educated (law) and supportive of the overall cause shows how bad the slogan is and that it's red meat for the right.  Defund literally means to eliminate funding. But then again, the generation of individuals who are using "defund" and saying "it doesn't actually mean to fully defund" are the same people who have changed the definition of the word "literally."

Reform or demilitarize are the correct terms to use. No more military weaponry. Do small towns really need tanks (https://twitter.com/i/status/1273655533510242308)?  More training on de-escalation. My wife's friend is an African-American and former cop who said there is simply not enough de-escalation emphasis for on-duty officers. Eliminate police immunity and break the police unions. Finally, let's get some real background checks. The FBI warned that white supremacist groups were infiltrating the police and military over a decade ago and it's only getting worse.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 12:22:57 PM
Brother MU, you and I are at different points in the political spectrum, but we are not far apart on this. Small moves can make big differences. For example, even in our home, my wife and I one evening after this started raised a series of "what if" questions about race that basically allowed us in our private conversations to explore where we need to change (and both of us are pretty liberal on how we think we should treat each other)

Sample question we discussed: "What if a couple of a different race with teenagers moved into the house next door?" Would we (a) Embrace them, bring them into a close-knit group of friends, have them over for dinner and welcome them into our lives; (b) Be friendly but distant; or, (c) Ignore them and even look for faults. Real question, real life example for some people in our community. Possibly for us in the future.

Another point, here in Chicago (I'm back for the summer and fall) what is our television news saying about the local African American Community? In our house, NBC5 tends to be the news choice (the "Lovely Allison News") at 6 p.m., and 10 p.m. In a 13-14 minute news hole, about 11-12 minutes are shootings, violence, fires, car accidents, robberies and thefts. The Lovely Allison makes her faces and talks about how tragic it is, but here you have a Caucasian woman and her Caucasian partner bringing you the nightly crime report. The vast majority of what they report comes from either the West Side or South Side or the inner-ring suburbs that are often predominantly African-American.

We're addicted to crime news here and our TV producers know it generates viewers. It's also got great visuals and someone can stand out in front of a squad car or nasty crime scene and talk to Police. "It's sooooo sad," says the Lovely Allison as she moves to the next crime story. Maybe we need to rethink TV news as one means of changing the feeling too many people have.

Which inner ring suburb is predominantly African American? 

Cicero: Latinx
Oak Park: White
Elmwood Park: White
Evanston: White
Stickney: White
Evergreen Park: White
Niles: White
Franklin Park: White
Norridge: White
Schiller Park: White


If you're referring to the south ones like Dolton riverdale calumet etc that makes sense but if the inner ring means touching the city I think they aren't as African American as you think. They're definitely more diverse in race and class but not majority African American imo

Quote from: Galway Eagle on June 19, 2020, 01:48:52 PM
Which inner ring suburb is predominantly African American? 

Cicero: Latinx
Oak Park: White
Elmwood Park: White
Evanston: White
Stickney: White
Evergreen Park: White
Niles: White
Franklin Park: White
Norridge: White
Schiller Park: White


If you're referring to the south ones like Dolton riverdale calumet etc that makes sense but if the inner ring means touching the city I think they aren't as African American as you think. They're definitely more diverse in race and class but not majority African American imo

Let's also consider Maywood, Bellwood and Broadview. Maybe it's because I live in Lake County but I tend to think of anything within about five miles of the city limits as inner ring (as opposed to Naperville, Wheaton, Chicago Heights etc., which are outer edge suburbs.

Quote from: MU82 on June 19, 2020, 01:00:51 PM
dg:

Regardless of where I have lived - be it Minneapolis, Chicago or now Charlotte - I have not watched the local news in so long that I can't remember the last time I did. Maybe 1990-something? And it's just for the reasons you state. I don't need to see every fire, every murder and every fluff piece about a cat who whistles. I think there have been surveys that show the main reason people watch local news is for the weather; I guess they've never heard of The Weather Channel. Or the weather app on their smartphone.

In Chicago, they just want to watch Cheryl Scott do the weather on ABC7. She's a size three body slammed into a size 0 dress. It has the desired effect.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/5kk4b5vBCL3lcGDIem1wWS?si=Zlzx4p4HSXuOWB8rXMl7cQ

This is a very long podcast by Sam Harris, noted liberal, atheist, philosopher and neuroscientist. He is very much anti Trump, but fears our dishonesty about how we approach racism, the police, BLM, etc., may provide him with a path to victory. Lots of data that challenges common perceptions and indicates most (especially in the media and positions of power) are fearful of honest conversation on the subject. Informative and worthwhile if one takes the time to listen.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 02:04:34 PM
In Chicago, they just want to watch Cheryl Scott do the weather on ABC7. She's a size three body slammed into a size 0 dress. It has the desired effect.

that's par for the course for Chicago newscasts:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=82LSFob0b3U

Quote from: Fluffy Blue Monster on June 19, 2020, 07:31:54 AM
Ah so rocket is going with being distracted and not focusing on the main issues at hand.

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.
[/quote]

you guys are so predictable.  if someone disagrees with you or has an opposing point of view, claim they are too stupid and unaware of what's going on.  good one.  safe where i am?  how about you here on scoop?  us few conservatives are the ones who are constantly challenged.  real courage(out of your safety bubble)would be to challenge some of your liberal brethren here on scoop.  question the stuff that has continued to fail in our major cities.  that would be uncomfortable for you university types?  careful to stray from the "group think du jour"?  "safe bubble"??  the irony and the projection is special   

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 02:01:12 PM
Let's also consider Maywood, Bellwood and Broadview. Maybe it's because I live in Lake County but I tend to think of anything within about five miles of the city limits as inner ring (as opposed to Naperville, Wheaton, Chicago Heights etc., which are outer edge suburbs.

fair enough if that's your definition. But I just wanted to point out that the perception of far out suburban individuals thinking the city is all big and bad once you get out of downtown all the way to the far suburbs was only made worse by your statement that inner ring suburbs are often all African American and on the nightly news for crimes.

Maywoods a hole. There's some more in the two proviso districts and the south ones are rough too but outside of that the inner ring are decent diverse places with slightly more crime just due to the proximity. 

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 19, 2020, 02:28:14 PM
https://open.spotify.com/episode/5kk4b5vBCL3lcGDIem1wWS?si=Zlzx4p4HSXuOWB8rXMl7cQ

This is a very long podcast by Sam Harris, noted liberal, atheist, philosopher and neuroscientist. He is very much anti Trump, but fears our dishonesty about how we approach racism, the police, BLM, etc., may provide him with a path to victory. Lots of data that challenges common perceptions and indicates most (especially in the media and positions of power) are fearful of honest conversation on the subject. Informative and worthwhile if one takes the time to listen.

Did he discuss his views on how black people are inherently less intelligent than whites?
It's always interesting how those who hold such views always present themselves as just "being honest" and as settled science, which is far from the truth.
Anyhow, maybe I'll give it a listen. Who better to lead an honest discussion of black America than a wealthy white guy?

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 19, 2020, 02:52:57 PM

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.


you guys are so predictable.  if someone disagrees with you or has an opposing point of view, claim they are too stupid and unaware of what's going on.  good one.  safe where i am?  how about you here on scoop?  us few conservatives are the ones who are constantly challenged.  real courage(out of your safety bubble)would be to challenge some of your liberal brethren here on scoop.  question the stuff that has continued to fail in our major cities.  that would be uncomfortable for you university types?  careful to stray from the "group think du jour"?  "safe bubble"??  the irony and the projection is special   

You're not even trying.

The problem is conservatives typically are cool with status quo.  By definition, "holding to traditional attitudes and values and cautious about change or innovation, typically in relation to politics or religion."  That's why you're constantly challenged, because your ethos is tells you that change is anathema. 

Also, I'm not sure why you are attempting to lump everyone here as liberals involved in some sort of circle jerk.  It's far from that.  Many of us agree and disagree with each other regularly.  But I guess you see what you want to see as long as it fits your narrow world view.  I'm only asking you to step outside it for once.  You don't have to agree with anyone here, but at least make an attempt at reading things that make you feel uncomfortable instead of dismissing them outright.

Quote from: MU82 on June 18, 2020, 09:39:58 AM
Why are people talking more about systemic racism today? Because video evidence caught white cops murdering innocent black people in cold blood, prompting fed-up black folks to take part in protests, some of which turned violent. All of which got everybody talking about all things relating to race, and even got some people in power trying to do something about it. There's more media, especially social media, than ever before, too, so it amplifies the conversation. Today, every man, woman and child with a smartphone is a "reporter." That's why there's more discussion of systemic racism today than, say, the previous 11 years.

As for your apparent disdain or inability to understand what systemic racism is ...

I think most would say it is when the majority race in a society uses discrimination in criminal justice, housing, health care, political policy-setting, employment, education, etc, to keep minority races down. Many (most?) black people in America have been subject to all of that, and it simply doesn't happen in White America. For example, by and large, a white person who is stopped with a broken tail-light is not likely to be told by a white cop to get out of the car, searched illegally, forced to spread-eagle against the car, and beaten if he says a word. Hence, the racism is built into the system, and it's certainly built into policing.

The matter-of-fact brutality in the Floyd case has made even people like you go, "Whoa, that was bad." Of course, had it not been caught on video, you would have believed Chauvin if he had said Floyd tried to kill him; after all, his 3 buddies would have been eyewitnesses and backed up whatever account was necessary to let their pal get away with murder. You wouldn't have even given a 1% possibility to the notion that Floyd was the victim and the cops were bad. That casual dismissal of the black man's rights also would be an example of systemic racism. I wonder how many cops have gotten away with dozens ... hundreds ... thousands of similar situations over the last few decades because there was no video evidence to hold the cops accountable. Another example of systemic racism. Chauvin had a history of racism and violence, yet he kept his job, which made it possible for him to murder Floyd. More systemic racism.

You don't like the term "systemic racism"? Cool. You don't have to use it. But if you don't understand why the conversation is advancing now, why black people and those who believe black lives matter have gotten so fed up that they are doing what they are doing, you are even more blind than your posts on the subject suggest.

Unfortunately, it took a near race riot to get us white folks out of our comfortable, suburban, gated bubbles ... even if it's mostly to say, "Chauvin was bad, but rioting is just as bad if not worse," like some Scoopers have done.

Hell, even your emperor - who 2 weeks ago used his militia to attack peaceful protesters so he could stage a photo-op - is actually trying to listen to black people. What he's proposing is window dressing, and it's hard to take him seriously given his decades of racist words and deeds, but at least he's pretending to try. You might do at least that much.

this is what i mean...how can one even respond to this.  so many false premises which of course come from your bias.  hard to have an honest dialogue with this,  once again, i'll have to hang up and let you guys circle jerk each other

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 19, 2020, 02:52:57 PM

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.


you guys are so predictable.  if someone disagrees with you or has an opposing point of view, claim they are too stupid and unaware of what's going on.  good one.  safe where i am?  how about you here on scoop?  us few conservatives are the ones who are constantly challenged.  real courage(out of your safety bubble)would be to challenge some of your liberal brethren here on scoop.  question the stuff that has continued to fail in our major cities.  that would be uncomfortable for you university types?  careful to stray from the "group think du jour"?  "safe bubble"??  the irony and the projection is special   

Could not of said it better. I wonder how many here agree with Hards_alum that there should be no jail time for non-volient crimes like B&Es, embezzlement, perjury and I guess as long you don't harm the kid, kidnapping. I think I was the only one who disagreed with him.

I do agree with most here that there is systemic racism it just runs both ways. Until that stops there will be no end to it.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 12:22:57 PM
Brother MU, you and I are at different points in the political spectrum, but we are not far apart on this. Small moves can make big differences. For example, even in our home, my wife and I one evening after this started raised a series of "what if" questions about race that basically allowed us in our private conversations to explore where we need to change (and both of us are pretty liberal on how we think we should treat each other)

Sample question we discussed: "What if a couple of a different race with teenagers moved into the house next door?" Would we (a) Embrace them, bring them into a close-knit group of friends, have them over for dinner and welcome them into our lives; (b) Be friendly but distant; or, (c) Ignore them and even look for faults. Real question, real life example for some people in our community. Possibly for us in the future.

Another point, here in Chicago (I'm back for the summer and fall) what is our television news saying about the local African American Community? In our house, NBC5 tends to be the news choice (the "Lovely Allison News") at 6 p.m., and 10 p.m. In a 13-14 minute news hole, about 11-12 minutes are shootings, violence, fires, car accidents, robberies and thefts. The Lovely Allison makes her faces and talks about how tragic it is, but here you have a Caucasian woman and her Caucasian partner bringing you the nightly crime report. The vast majority of what they report comes from either the West Side or South Side or the inner-ring suburbs that are often predominantly African-American.

We're addicted to crime news here and our TV producers know it generates viewers. It's also got great visuals and someone can stand out in front of a squad car or nasty crime scene and talk to Police. "It's sooooo sad," says the Lovely Allison as she moves to the next crime story. Maybe we need to rethink TV news as one means of changing the feeling too many people have.

This is the big disconnect right here  for some people here and elsewhere in my opinion. It isn't good enough to wait for the black family to move in next door or down the street. You have to physically go spend time with black people in black neighborhoods if you want to learn and understand. Many have no desire to do this.

Too many white people in their white neighborhoods who don't intentionally do this. Experience is a cure for ignorance. Either that is something that matters to you or it doesn't. Your choice. I am using you as the example here but that goes the same for anyone else.

Quote from: Galway Eagle on June 19, 2020, 02:53:40 PM
fair enough if that's your definition. But I just wanted to point out that the perception of far out suburban individuals thinking the city is all big and bad once you get out of downtown all the way to the far suburbs was only made worse by your statement that inner ring suburbs are often all African American and on the nightly news for crimes.

Maywoods a hole. There's some more in the two proviso districts and the south ones are rough too but outside of that the inner ring are decent diverse places with slightly more crime just due to the proximity.

I agree. Oak Park is fantastic, as is Evanston. There are neighborhoods, even on the far west side of Chicago that are incredible. I lived in the area for 40 years and love the city — just not its government!

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 19, 2020, 05:13:19 PM
Could not of said it better.

LOL. If rocket's barely-English is the best it can be said...

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 19, 2020, 05:13:19 PMI do agree with most here that there is systemic racism it just runs both ways.

There are no words.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 19, 2020, 05:56:46 PM
I agree. Oak Park is fantastic, as is Evanston. There are neighborhoods, even on the far west side of Chicago that are incredible. I lived in the area for 40 years and love the city — just not its government!

Even though I lived in Chicago for far less time than I lived in several other places, somehow I still identify that has sort of "home", even though I was born in Wisconsin. Yup, the government has been a mess sever since I've known it, but I still love the city...which I guess I'm not supposed to as a Wisconsinite, but you can't beat the Chicago neighborhoods IMO.

I'm sure I am biased from living there after right after Marquette--lots of friends, enough money to have fun, and no responsibilities.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 19, 2020, 05:13:19 PM
Could not of said it better. I wonder how many here agree with Hards_alum that there should be no jail time for non-volient crimes like B&Es, embezzlement, perjury and I guess as long you don't harm the kid, kidnapping. I think I was the only one who disagreed with him.

I do agree with most here that there is systemic racism it just runs both ways. Until that stops there will be no end to it.

First off, literally anyone could have said it better. 

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/2bf30b6dfae9bd44be613a13deb6b52b/tenor.gif)

I said no jail time for non violent crimes.  I know simple things are hard for you to read, and then understand.  Easier to just be told what to think by your favorite talking head on cable news.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 19, 2020, 02:59:10 PM
Did he discuss his views on how black people are inherently less intelligent than whites?
It's always interesting how those who hold such views always present themselves as just "being honest" and as settled science, which is far from the truth.
Anyhow, maybe I'll give it a listen. Who better to lead an honest discussion of black America than a wealthy white guy?

I think you're being less than honest about Sam Harris.

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 19, 2020, 02:52:57 PM

I should have suspected he didn't have the intellectual curiosity to look outside his Fox News / OAN bubble.  He's safe where he is.  It's comfortable there.


you guys are so predictable.  if someone disagrees with you or has an opposing point of view, claim they are too stupid and unaware of what's going on.  good one.  safe where i am?  how about you here on scoop?  us few conservatives are the ones who are constantly challenged.  real courage(out of your safety bubble)would be to challenge some of your liberal brethren here on scoop.  question the stuff that has continued to fail in our major cities.  that would be uncomfortable for you university types?  careful to stray from the "group think du jour"?  "safe bubble"??  the irony and the projection is special   

Yep. More talking points. Wonder if you'll ever run out?

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 19, 2020, 07:27:35 PM
I think you're being less than honest about Sam Harris.

Not really.


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/27/15695060/sam-harris-charles-murray-race-iq-forbidden-knowledge-podcast-bell-curve

Quote from: Pakuni on June 19, 2020, 08:23:39 PM
Not really.


https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/27/15695060/sam-harris-charles-murray-race-iq-forbidden-knowledge-podcast-bell-curve

I read the article - all it proves to me is that even left leaning scientists who are willing to consider data/facts that don't support the left's orthodoxy are unwelcome in conversations, especially those on the campuses.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 19, 2020, 08:50:20 PM
I read the article - all it proves to me is that even left leaning scientists who are willing to consider data/facts that don't support the left's orthodoxy are unwelcome in conversations, especially those on the campuses.

You didn't read the article if that's what you think it said. I mean, that's not even close, Lenny.
Do you agree with Harris and Murray?

Quote from: rocket surgeon on June 19, 2020, 03:39:29 PM
this is what i mean...how can one even respond to this.  so many false premises which of course come from your bias.  hard to have an honest dialogue with this,  once again, i'll have to hang up and let you guys circle jerk each other

There were no "false premises" at all in what I wrote. And again, you asked about systemic racism and a few of us have tried to give answers, but you didn't really want any answers. You aren't even willing to try to understand what is meant by it.

Sad to say, on the issue of race in America anyway, you're not worth having a discussion with. You've already made up your mind. Which, BTW, is another sign of systemic racism. Have a nice night.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 19, 2020, 09:10:48 PM
You didn't read the article if that's what you think it said. I mean, that's not even close, Lenny.
Do you agree with Harris and Murray?

About what? IQ being mostly genetic? I think the data says yes, but I also agree that centuries of inequality contribute to differences among the races. Final answer? I don't know. But I am interested in what intellectuals and scientists extrapolate from data, whether I come to the same conclusions as them or not.

I have listened to many of Sam Harris's podcasts. Sometimes I agree with his conclusions, sometimes I don't. But they do make me think and challenge my preconceived notions. I don't think that there is even a little bit of racism in Sam Harris. But unlike people interested in defending orthodoxy (like Vox), the data sometimes leads him to leave the reservation.

Maybe that's not for you, but if so I'm surprised.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 19, 2020, 09:57:22 PM
About what? IQ being mostly genetic? I think the data says yes, but I also agree that centuries of inequality contribute to differences among the races. Final answer? I don't know. But I am interested in what intellectuals and scientists extrapolate from data, whether I come to the same conclusions as them or not.

I have listened to many of Sam Harris's podcasts. Sometimes I agree with his conclusions, sometimes I don't. But they do make me think and challenge my preconceived notions. I don't think that there is even a little bit of racism in Sam Harris. But unlike people interested in defending orthodoxy (like Vox), the data sometimes leads him to leave the reservation.

Maybe that's not for you, but if so I'm surprised.

I think you know that's not the question I was asking, but I can understand why you didn't answer.
I do think you're deceiving yourself if you believe a guy who's made his name attacking religion is somehow free of orthodoxy, but so be it.
Anyhow, I suggest you read the Harris-Klein debate, the transcript of which is linked below. You may find it interesting. I particularly enjoyed Sam's insistence that he's somehow immune to tribalism and identity politics.

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/9/17210248/sam-harris-ezra-klein-charles-murray-transcript-podcast

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 19, 2020, 05:13:19 PM
I do agree with most here that there is systemic racism it just runs both ways.

Please, please, please, PLEASE tell us that you don't really believe that the systems in place regarding criminal justice, housing, health care, political policy-setting, employment, education, etc, have been keeping the white man down in America these last several centuries.

Please.

Quote from: MU82 on June 20, 2020, 10:43:03 AM
Please, please, please, PLEASE tell us that you don't really believe that the systems in place regarding criminal justice, housing, health care, political policy-setting, employment, education, etc, have been keeping the white man down in America these last several centuries.

Please.

I think we ALL know where MU 69 is coming from here.

Quote from: Jockey on June 20, 2020, 10:55:20 AM
I think we ALL know where MU 69 is coming from here.

Don't rush to judgment. Maybe he just misspoke. We all do it occasionally.

Seriously, let him explain.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 19, 2020, 10:35:22 PM
I think you know that's not the question I was asking, but I can understand why you didn't answer.
I do think you're deceiving yourself if you believe a guy who's made his name attacking religion is somehow free of orthodoxy, but so be it.
Anyhow, I suggest you read the Harris-Klein debate, the transcript of which is linked below. You may find it interesting. I particularly enjoyed Sam's insistence that he's somehow immune to tribalism and identity politics.

https://www.vox.com/2018/4/9/17210248/sam-harris-ezra-klein-charles-murray-transcript-podcast

Thanks, Pakuni, I listened to the podcast and found it informative and revealing - though I'm afraid we may have reached different conclusions. On substance, I felt the "debate" was no contest. Ezra is a political policy guy who seemed totally disinterested in data, especially any that might suggest to some (and not even to Sam!) that traditional liberal policies might be counter productive. Harris looks for the truth even when it's uncomfortable and contradicts his world view. I came away still a fan of Harris, not so much of Klein.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 20, 2020, 11:03:47 PM
Thanks, Pakuni, I listened to the podcast and found it informative and revealing - though I'm afraid we may have reached different conclusions. On substance, I felt the "debate" was no contest. Ezra is a political policy guy who seemed totally disinterested in data, especially any that might suggest to some (and not even to Sam!) that traditional liberal policies might be counter productive. Harris looks for the truth even when it's uncomfortable and contradicts his world view. I came away still a fan of Harris, not so much of Klein.

I figured you and I would have very different conclusions from that debate, given that we went in with very different biases and perspectives.
To me, Harris comes off as someone not only eager to play the victim, and also one who not only can't see his own tribalism, but insists that he and he alone is somehow above tribalism.

As for data, I think you're missing the point. Nobody in this discussion is arguing the data, as much as Harris wants that to be the case. The data is the data.
The debate is over what the data means and what to do with that. Murray looks at the data and says "Blacks are genetically inferior when it comes to intellect" and social policy should be tailored to recognize this. Harris at the very least doesn't contradict the former, though he does disagree with Murray's social policy (mostly UBI, which is interesting given their respective political beliefs).
Klein and those on his side say look at the data and say "this is what happens when you oppress, traumatize and deny opportunities to an entire race of people for four centuries."
That's why, by their own admission, Klein and Harris spend most of this discussion talking past one another. Harris wants to make it about the data, Klein wants to make it about the interpretation.

IBTL

Quote from: real chili 83 on June 21, 2020, 10:52:10 AM
IBTL

Why? Very respectful discussion between Lenny's and Pakuni.

Quote from: Pakuni on June 21, 2020, 07:35:06 AM
I figured you and I would have very different conclusions from that debate, given that we went in with very different biases and perspectives.
To me, Harris comes off as someone not only eager to play the victim, and also one who not only can't see his own tribalism, but insists that he and he alone is somehow above tribalism.

As for data, I think you're missing the point. Nobody in this discussion is arguing the data, as much as Harris wants that to be the case. The data is the data.
The debate is over what the data means and what to do with that. Murray looks at the data and says "Blacks are genetically inferior when it comes to intellect" and social policy should be tailored to recognize this. Harris at the very least doesn't contradict the former, though he does disagree with Murray's social policy (mostly UBI, which is interesting given their respective political beliefs).
Klein and those on his side say look at the data and say "this is what happens when you oppress, traumatize and deny opportunities to an entire race of people for four centuries."
That's why, by their own admission, Klein and Harris spend most of this discussion talking past one another. Harris wants to make it about the data, Klein wants to make it about the interpretation.

Pakuni

I think you do Harris's belief's a disservice and characterize them unfairly. He's a scientist who respects data even when it conflicts with his admitted biases. That doesn't mean that he thinks "he alone is above tribalism", only that he doesn't defend what his tribe posits when the data proves (or at least indicates) that it's false.

Regarding victim hood, people like Stein who lead, encourage or at the very least wash their hands of their followers when they threaten, intimidate and try to silence scientists whose data and conclusions they don't like are major contributors to our current toxic environment, IMO.

I don't know if you had the time to listen to Harris's "Can We Pull Back From the Brink?" podcast I linked. I thought it was brave and insightful. I fear you would think otherwise but I would be nonetheless interested in your thoughts.

Happy Father's Day.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 21, 2020, 04:15:20 PM
Pakuni

I think you do Harris's belief's a disservice and characterize them unfairly. He's a scientist who respects data even when it conflicts with his admitted biases. That doesn't mean that he thinks "he alone is above tribalism", only that he doesn't defend what his tribe posits when the data proves (or at least indicates) that it's false.

Regarding victim hood, people like Stein who lead, encourage or at the very least wash their hands of their followers when they threaten, intimidate and try to silence scientists whose data and conclusions they don't like are major contributors to our current toxic environment, IMO.

I don't know if you had the time to listen to Harris's "Can We Pull Back From the Brink?" podcast I linked. I thought it was brave and insightful. I fear you would think otherwise but I would be nonetheless interested in your thoughts.

Happy Father's Day.

Lenny ... I appreciate the conversation and the Father's Day wishes (and back at you). But I think I'll end it here, because, like Harris and Klein, it seems we're not on the same page as to what the conversation is about.
I will say, just to clarify though, it's not me saying Harris thinks he's above being tribalistic here. I'm not making that up. He says it himself a couple of times.
Also, I see no evidence of Klein threatening or leading any effort to silence anyone here. He listened to Harris' podcast with Murray and wrote a column critical of it. Isn't that the kind of free exchange of ideas we're supposed to embrace? Instead, it spurred a series of attacks by Harris (read his emails, if you don't believe me). If anyone is trying to silence others here. it's Harris trying to silence those who criticize him.
And I've probably said more than I intended. Best to you.

Quote from: MU82 on June 19, 2020, 09:15:02 PM
There were no "false premises" at all in what I wrote. And again, you asked about systemic racism and a few of us have tried to give answers, but you didn't really want any answers. You aren't even willing to try to understand what is meant by it.

Sad to say, on the issue of race in America anyway, you're not worth having a discussion with. You've already made up your mind. Which, BTW, is another sign of systemic racism. Have a nice night.

https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731839/new-study-says-white-police-officers-are-not-more-likely-to-shoot-minority-suspe

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 22, 2020, 08:00:46 AM
https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731839/new-study-says-white-police-officers-are-not-more-likely-to-shoot-minority-suspe

Did you read this article? Because I'm not sure it says what you think it says. This does nothing to debunk systematic racism in policing.

Quote from: muwarrior69 on June 22, 2020, 08:00:46 AM
https://www.npr.org/2019/07/26/745731839/new-study-says-white-police-officers-are-not-more-likely-to-shoot-minority-suspe

I didn't say white cops were more likely to shoot black people. I said IMHO white cops (and cops in general) are more likely to shoot, hassle, attack, frisk or use unnecessary force against black people for the sole reason being that those people are black.

And this study does not refute that one iota. Here is the final paragraph in the link you provided:

The real question here is not whether race is a factor in police shootings, but when? Is it beforehand in all the things that might lead up to a shooting, such as drug laws or racial profiling? Or does it come down to the skin color of the individual cop holding the gun?

If you get pulled over by a cop because your tail-light is out, muw69, you will NEVER be forced to get out of the car and spread eagle on the trunk. If your black friend is pulled over by a cop because his tail-light is out, he very well might be forced to get out of the car and spread eagle on the trunk.

If you are jogging through a park in a nice neighborhood, minding your own business, you will NEVER get stopped by a cop. If your black friend is jogging through the exact same park, minding his own business, he very well might be stopped and hassled by a cop.

THAT is what I am saying.

George Floyd is dead today because he was black; if he were white, he'd still be alive. I am 100% certain of that. It's systemic racism, the same thing that led to a noose being placed in Bubba Wallace's garage yesterday at Talladega.

Or you can keep denying it and join Ners in pretending that Obama getting elected "proved" that systemic racism doesn't exist.

A 4 minute "discussion" of a study doesn't get past the headlines, let alone provide any insight for possible solutions. Maybe that's perfect for Scoop.

Quote from: Lennys Tap on June 22, 2020, 12:39:05 PM
A 4 minute "discussion" of a study doesn't get past the headlines, let alone provide any insight for possible solutions. Maybe that's perfect for Scoop.

(https://media.tenor.com/images/cb61d74e46d1c4bc911b19df487682d6/tenor.gif)

Years ago, there was circumstance in Nashville much like the debate we're having today. It's symptomatic of the problem and the limits of what we can legislate and regulate.

Perry Wallace was a Nashville basketball phenom. In the mid-1960s, his Pearl High team was the first to play an all-white high school in Nashville and later that team was the first predominantly African-American team to win the state title. Mr. Wallace had his choice of schools and chose Vanderbilt, where he majored in Engineering and desegregated the SEC. He was graduated from Vanderbilt in 1970 and later went on to law school at Columbia and to have a distinguished career as a law professor and head of the Justice Department's environmental litigation group.

Mr. Wallace caught it in the chin throughout the southeast, including in Tennessee. So when Mr. Wallace completed his eligibility, he did a lengthy interview with The Tennessean (1970), where he outlined not only his struggle in places like Starkville, Oxford and Tuscaloosa but his struggle for acceptance at Vanderbilt. You can guess how the Nashville community reacted: "He had so much opportunity presented to him -- and now he has the unmitigated gall to criticize us????"

His criticism of Vanderbilt went to a simple premise that we must consider today: Admitted but not accepted. Admitted means African-Americans have been "allowed" into main stream American life. African-Americans now go to college, have professional jobs, served in private and government capacities and can attend church, go to restaurants, stay in hotels, shop and have governmental protection against overt discrimination.

Acceptance means we are truly one. Back in the day, it meant nobody cared what Mr. Wallace looked like if we wanted to join a fraternity (a big deal at Vanderbilt) or otherwise participate in the social and cultural life on campus. For us, it means breaking the shackles of our tribalism and seeing everyone as our brother and sister, the way Jesus taught us. To a comment, earlier who was mildly critical of me for waiting for someone not like me to move in next door, Brother, you are right. It's up to each of us to reach out where and how we can. At a very minimum, we may not agree with some of the protesters' goals and objectives but we have to stop screaming back and rather start listening. Our vision may not change in terms of how to accomplish a mutual goal, but our hearts might.

No government can do this for us. Nor can any religion (thought it might help to study Jesus' teachings and reflect). We have to do it ourselves. The sooner the better.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 23, 2020, 09:03:22 AM
Years ago, there was circumstance in Nashville much like the debate we're having today. It's symptomatic of the problem and the limits of what we can legislate and regulate.

Perry Wallace was a Nashville basketball phenom. In the mid-1960s, his Pearl High team was the first to play an all-white high school in Nashville and later that team was the first predominantly African-American team to win the state title. Mr. Wallace had his choice of schools and chose Vanderbilt, where he majored in Engineering and desegregated the SEC. He was graduated from Vanderbilt in 1970 and later went on to law school at Columbia and to have a distinguished career as a law professor and head of the Justice Department's environmental litigation group.

Mr. Wallace caught it in the chin throughout the southeast, including in Tennessee. So when Mr. Wallace completed his eligibility, he did a lengthy interview with The Tennessean (1970), where he outlined not only his struggle in places like Starkville, Oxford and Tuscaloosa but his struggle for acceptance at Vanderbilt. You can guess how the Nashville community reacted: "He had so much opportunity presented to him -- and now he has the unmitigated gall to criticize us????"

His criticism of Vanderbilt went to a simple premise that we must consider today: Admitted but not accepted. Admitted means African-Americans have been "allowed" into main stream American life. African-Americans now go to college, have professional jobs, served in private and government capacities and can attend church, go to restaurants, stay in hotels, shop and have governmental protection against overt discrimination.

Acceptance means we are truly one. Back in the day, it meant nobody cared what Mr. Wallace looked like if we wanted to join a fraternity (a big deal at Vanderbilt) or otherwise participate in the social and cultural life on campus. For us, it means breaking the shackles of our tribalism and seeing everyone as our brother and sister, the way Jesus taught us. To a comment, earlier who was mildly critical of me for waiting for someone not like me to move in next door, Brother, you are right. It's up to each of us to reach out where and how we can. At a very minimum, we may not agree with some of the protesters' goals and objectives but we have to stop screaming back and rather start listening. Our vision may not change in terms of how to accomplish a mutual goal, but our hearts might.

No government can do this for us. Nor can any religion (thought it might help to study Jesus' teachings and reflect). We have to do it ourselves. The sooner the better.

There is a New York Times Best Selling Book: "Strong Inside" which is a highly recommended biography of Perry Wallace. There is also a documentary film: "Triumph"

Vanderbilt renamed a portion of 25th Avenue South where Memorial Gym resides: "Perry Wallace Way" last year.

As mentioned, Perry Wallace was the first Black basketball player in the SEC in 1967, graduating in 1970. He was an All SEC performer and drafted by the NBA. An Electrical Engineering student he went to Columbia University Law School and was a Trial Attorney at the Department of Justice before becoming a long time Law Professor before his death a few years ago.

Vanderbilt is now double digit % black student population, and 50% white. It's also increased its geographic diversity to roughly equal percentages in all parts of the country.

Ten years ago James Franklin became the first Black head coach of any major sport at Vandy. Now, they have the first Female Black Athletic Director in the SEC (Candice Storey Lee) who replaced Black AD Malcolm Turner who replaced retiring Black Athletic Director David Williams. Vandy became the only Power 5 school with a Black head coach in both football and basketball  (Derrick Mason and Jerry Stackhouse)

Progress has taken far too long, and there is a long way to go,  but it's never too late get started and keep it going.

Quote from: shoothoops on June 23, 2020, 09:47:21 AM
There is a New York Times Best Selling Book: "Strong Inside" which is a highly recommended biography of Perry Wallace. There is also a documentary film: "Triumph"

Vanderbilt renamed a portion of 25th Avenue South where Memorial Gym resides: "Perry Wallace Way" last year.

As mentioned, Perry Wallace was the first Black basketball player in the SEC in 1967, graduating in 1970. He was an All SEC performer and drafted by the NBA. An Electrical Engineering student he went to Columbia University Law School and was a Trial Attorney at the Department of Justice before becoming a long time Law Professor before his death a few years ago.

Progress has taken far too long, and there is a long way to go,  but it's never too late get started and keep it going.

I read Strong Inside and re-read this year. It is an unbelievably good book.

Perry Wallace is a personal hero to me. The dignity with which he led his life in the face of adversity is what we're called to do. He was an incredible man. As a youngster growing up in Nashville, I frequently saw him at Memorial Gym and he was an unbelievable talent who never got the respect he deserved. The high school that challenged Nashville Pearl to the first integrated basketball game in Tennessee was my high school (and Chick's too!), Nashville Father Ryan. I was taught by some of the people who made that game happen.

I only wish our paths had somehow crossed so I could explain how I felt about him.

That said, Vanderbilt is not blame-free in how they treated Perry Wallace. After the Tennessean article in 1970, Mr. Wallace left town and Vanderbilt did everything humanly possible to erase his legacy. Not until CM Newton became athletic director at Vanderbilt and someone asked, "who was Perry Wallace?" did anyone pay any attention. Mr. Newton invited Mr. Wallace back to campus and only then did the respect for Perry Wallace begin. His number is now retired by Vanderbilt.

Quote from: dgies9156 on June 23, 2020, 12:23:35 PM
I read Strong Inside and re-read this year. It is an unbelievably good book.

Perry Wallace is a personal hero to me. The dignity with which he led his life in the face of adversity is what we're called to do. He was an incredible man. As a youngster growing up in Nashville, I frequently saw him at Memorial Gym and he was an unbelievable talent who never got the respect he deserved. The high school that challenged Nashville Pearl to the first integrated basketball game in Tennessee was my high school (and Chick's too!), Nashville Father Ryan. I was taught by some of the people who made that game happen.

I only wish our paths had somehow crossed so I could explain how I felt about him.

That said, Vanderbilt is not blame-free in how they treated Perry Wallace. After the Tennessean article in 1970, Mr. Wallace left town and Vanderbilt did everything humanly possible to erase his legacy. Not until CM Newton became athletic director at Vanderbilt and someone asked, "who was Perry Wallace?" did anyone pay any attention. Mr. Newton invited Mr. Wallace back to campus and only then did the respect for Perry Wallace begin. His number is now retired by Vanderbilt.

Vanderbilt wasn't blame free then or now. But it's been a long while since Vandy has been a Regional White Anglo Saxon Protestant University if you will. Vandy still has a ways to go in a variety of ways but it has made a lot of progressive strides in more recent memory. And that will continue for future generations of alums as well. It's a difference place now.

CM Newton was certainly a step in a good direction before he left. But David Williams (as well as Nick Zeppos) is the biggest reason why Vanderbilt was able to eventually repair its relationship with Perry Wallace before both passed away in recent years. Williams became very close friends with both Wallace and his teammate Godfrey Dillard.

David Williams became a Law Professor at Vandy in 2000 and later Athletic Director, the first Black AD in the SEC. David is the reason for the Perry Wallace Basketball Scholarship, (there is also one in engineering) He is also the big reason for Wallace's jersey retirement and 50 year celebration, as well as Equality Weekend annually. It's considered Williams' biggest legacy at Vandy, and even at Williams' funeral, donations to the Perry Wallace scholarship were requested. Zeppos came to Vandy as a Law Professor in 1987, and later became Chancellor in 2007 before stepping down for health reasons recently. Williams arrived in 2000. He unexpectedly passed away the same day as his retirement party. Vandy has renamed its Rec Center after Williams.

It's very important to understand, and learn about Perry Wallace. It's also very important and valuable to also  create social change in addition to that, action at a place over time. Vandy has done a lot of that the past few decades and continues to do it moving forward. You can see it in the racial diversity of its non revenue sports teams as well.