Board 8 > Politics Containment Topic 149: Open 24/7 365 Snowflakes or not!

(+) Yeah! (+)

kevwaffles posted...

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=zomg

The "z" was originally a mistake while attempting to hit the shift key with the left hand, and type "OMG"

Ah. Neat :) thanks for thag
---

ImTheMacheteGuy posted...

kevwaffles posted...

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=zomg

The "z" was originally a mistake while attempting to hit the shift key with the left hand, and type "OMG"

Ah. Neat :) thanks for thag

I think it alludes to it but zomg is more like a durr or duh or that's stupid or who cares tone to it.

Like someone is like "hey I would a dollar on this scratch off"

And u reply "zomg what a big haul!"
---

oh hey trump's thanksgiving proclamation was pretty solid actually

I kept waiting for him to go off the rails and insult somebody but it never did
---

I did like how he referred to Hurricane Harvey as a big water job
---

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2017/11/24/egypt-mosque-attack-leaves-at-least-54-dead-75-wounded.html
---

It's now up to ~300 casualties
---

Saudi Arabia and Iran are going towards taking their proxy war to outright war
---

https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/934131805409697792

Will be calling the President of Egypt in a short while to discuss the tragic terrorist attack, with so much loss of life. We have to get TOUGHER AND SMARTER than ever before, and we will. Need the WALL, need the BAN! God bless the people of Egypt

At this point, what ban is he referring to?
---

wasn't 'the ban' only supposed to be for 90 days?

we're like eight months later
---

And its even been more than 90 days since the Supreme Court allowed a watered down version.

When he goes off like this it really exposes him
---

Why is he even mentioning the wall

Does he think Mexicans did it
---

Just trying to impart a heightened sense of outsiders are scary and you need to be afraid of them.
---

It's the theory that it's easier to get into Mexico from overseas and then cross into the US then it is to just get into the US from overseas. Which is probably true to some extent, but that's also kind of an argument against the ban at the same time.
---

dammit guys stop using this topic
---

GuessMyUserName posted...

dammit guys stop using this topic

Why does it bother you
---

Very tricky situation but Trump has stopped arming the Syrian Kurds.

As long as Turkey is an ally, aligning at all with the Kurds was always a very dangerous idea. That said, we armed them because it helped our cause with ISIS. However, we can't ignore the Kurds have conducted terrorist attacks in Turkey in hopes of the Kurds being allowed to separate there.
---

Why exactly are there two different politics topics on the front page?

Net neutrality stuff was dumped right around Thanksgiving to keep it out of public view.
---

Very tricky situation but Trump has stopped arming the Syrian Kurds.

I can't say I'm happy to hear that, but I won't fault the decision. From what little I know about the Kurds, they're kinda-pseudo-allies less because of any common cause and more because the Kurds aren't much more popular than we are in the region, so when the US shakes the pillars of heaven, the Kurds have nowhere to go but up.

I do hope it was a choice made based on strategy briefings and not Fox News, though.
---

MalcolmMasher posted...

Very tricky situation but Trump has stopped arming the Syrian Kurds.

I can't say I'm happy to hear that, but I won't fault the decision. From what little I know about the Kurds, they're kinda-pseudo-allies less because of any common cause and more because the Kurds aren't much more popular than we are in the region, so when the US shakes the pillars of heaven, the Kurds have nowhere to go but up.

I do hope it was a choice made based on strategy briefings and not Fox News, though.

Well, it's hard to tout our commitment to NATO from any President while we are actively arming a group that commits terrorist attacks against a NATO country.

Finding tributaries to fight our wars to keep our soldiers safe at the expense of other groups is great and all and probably necessary due to lack of nationalism in our country, but at the end of the day, the end game is dangerous. We are undermining an ally, and if after we are done finding them useful we turn on them, we have just armed a group that could turn against us. We seem to have failed to learn from Al-Qaeda.
---

Oh Lord and what is worse is that people believe this shit.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/20/ohio-state-university-privilege-workshop-says-only-white-people-can-be-racist.html
---

Corrik posted...

Oh Lord and what is worse is that people believe this shit.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/20/ohio-state-university-privilege-workshop-says-only-white-people-can-be-racist.html

So they're saying that Clayton Bixby, Dave Chappelle's blind, black kkk character can't be racist even though he wrote 4 racist propaganda books including one called "<n-word> Book" and yelled the n-word at white teenagers listening to rap?

Now that's just silly.
---

Yeah I tend to roll my eyes for those people.

Like if you want to argue that minorities are less racist than white people, fine (I disagree), but to say they don't exist is laughable.
---

You are conflating the colloquial definition of racism with what they are talking about
---

CeraSeptem posted...

You are conflating the colloquial definition of racism with what they are talking about

No. You are trying to justify racism as allowable because it isn't from the sources you want it to be from to support your own motives.
---

Incorrect, but you are free to continue using your chosen ignorance as a weapon to preserve your worldview.
---

CeraSeptem posted...

Incorrect, but you are free to continue using your chosen ignorance as a weapon to preserve your worldview.

Lol ok. Anyways.
---

"Every white woman raises a detriment to society when they raise a son. Someone with the HIGHEST propensity to be a terrorist, rapist, racist, killer, and domestic violence all star. Historically every son you had should be sacrificed to the wolves b___," the tweet read.

Lol... Indiana nurse on white women raising white son's.


---

http://money.cnn.com/2017/11/26/investing/stocks-week-ahead-sp-500/index.html

Longest wall street has not lowered by 3% more in US history now. From 4 days prior to Trumps election til now.
---

Corrik posted...

"Every white woman raises a detriment to society when they raise a son. Someone with the HIGHEST propensity to be a terrorist, rapist, racist, killer, and domestic violence all star. Historically every son you had should be sacrificed to the wolves b___," the tweet read.

Lol... Indiana nurse on white women raising white son's.

??

That apostrophe is garbage, but so is that Twitter message.
---

Corrik posted...

Oh Lord and what is worse is that people believe this shit.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/20/ohio-state-university-privilege-workshop-says-only-white-people-can-be-racist.html

Anyway, it is worth acknowledging this so that the next time Corrik posts on the topic (as he's done before) we can look back and remember that he's had this explained to him but is either too stupid to understand it and can therefore be safely ignored or is intentionally misrepresenting what is being said for his agenda (it's this one).
---

CeraSeptem posted...

Corrik posted...

Oh Lord and what is worse is that people believe this shit.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/20/ohio-state-university-privilege-workshop-says-only-white-people-can-be-racist.html

Anyway, it is worth acknowledging this so that the next time Corrik posts on the topic (as he's done before) we can look back and remember that he's had this explained to him but is either too stupid to understand it and can therefore be safely ignored or is intentionally misrepresenting what is being said for his agenda (it's this one).

"Hey, I said we changed the definition of racism! So, next time you say anyone can be racist we can know we already told you we changed the definition of racism to what we want it to try and act like certain people can't be racist to support our motives and agendas"

LMFAO. Literally defending the opinion that only white people can be racist.

Far Left.
---

Cera, of all the things to fight Corrik on, this one seems like a poor choice.

Just because he got it from Fox News doesn't mean it doesn't have supporting sources saying the same thing.
---

yeah I'm actually on corrik's side for this one
---

FFDragon posted...

yeah I'm actually on corrik's side for this one

---

trdl23 posted...

FFDragon posted...

yeah I'm actually on corrik's side for this one

This also seems like a bad hill to die on. Like you seem to agree other groups of people can do things that are inherently bigoted against other races, but want to argue thats not racism based on the academic definition of institutional racism instead of the more colloquial usage that Corrik is clearly using.

Institutional racism can still exist and Asian/Middle Eastern/Hispanic individuals can still be anti-Black. Just because sociology professors use one definition of racism in their writings, it doesnt make other usages of the word that predate that definition obsolete.
---

If seemingly white people are experiencing systemic racism then they're not really "white" anymore (see: the Irish like a hundred years ago). But PoC can still be racist to other PoC so saying "only white people can be racist" is definitely wrong. It's more like, white people can't experience racism without having whiteness denied to them at the same time.
---

kevwaffles posted...

Just because he got it from Fox News doesn't mean it doesn't have supporting sources saying the same thing.

i wish he'd link to something other than fox news, though.
---

Mr Lasastryke posted...

kevwaffles posted...

Just because he got it from Fox News doesn't mean it doesn't have supporting sources saying the same thing.

i wish he'd link to something other than fox news, though.

I wish you would only link CNN or FoxNews.
---

Corrik posted...

"Hey, I said we changed the definition of racism! So, next time you say anyone can be racist we can know we already told you we changed the definition of racism to what we want it to try and act like certain people can't be racist to support our motives and agendas"

Corrik posted...

No. You are trying to justify racism as allowable because it isn't from the sources you want it to be from to support your own motives.

Literally nowhere near what I said. Further demonstrating my point that you are either intentionally dishonest (it's this one) or incredibly stupid.

It's not even a changing of the definition. It's an academic use versus a colloquial one. This is some "evolution is just a theory" level bullshit.

The most common way of differentiating the two is referring to systems-based oppression as racism and individual acts as prejudice. Obviously, any person is capable of acts of prejudice, and it is likely that literally no one has ever claimed otherwise. When they are talking about "racism," however, they are not speaking about individuals or individual acts.

You know this, and are intentionally muddying the usage of the word because it suits your purposes. Because you know this and are intentionally muddying the issue, even now claiming I said things I never said (just as you claim they said things they did not say), makes it obvious that you are a liar. An honest man could, at the very least, acknowledge the distinction and still disagree, but you're not even decent enough to do that. In fact, as Kenri points out above, what they are saying (in the proper context) isn't even true. Wow, that was easy.

Suprak the Stud posted...

This also seems like a bad hill to die on. Like you seem to agree other groups of people can do things that are inherently bigoted against other races, but want to argue thats not racism based on the academic definition of institutional racism instead of the more colloquial usage that Corrik is clearly using.

Again, not what I said. I am pointing out that he is using what is essentially definition 2 of something to disprove definition 1, which as you say in the next sentence, is not how that works.

Suprak the Stud posted...

Institutional racism can still exist and Asian/Middle Eastern/Hispanic individuals can still be anti-Black. Just because sociology professors use one definition of racism in their writings, it doesnt make other usages of the word that predate that definition obsolete.

No one has said (or implied) otherwise. But there is a very clear demarcation between what the aforementioned group was talking about and the colloquial racism that Corrik was referring to, but he was intentionally conflating the two things because it is in his interest to "disprove" it. It's a strawman, and an obvious one. You can let him get away with it if you'd like, but it's my goal to educate (and while he is not interested in learning, perhaps someone else is).
---

Gonna have to join the "dumb hill to die on" camp on this one
---

Cera really can't complain about ulti or vlado anymore.
---

This is almost as bad as the whole pedophilia vs ephebophilia that derailed the topic a while back.

While what you are saying is true you also sound like you are arguing only white people are capable of institutional racism.
---

charmander6000 posted...

This is almost as bad as the whole pedophilia vs ephebophilia that derailed the topic a while back.

While what you are saying is true you also sound like you are arguing only white people are capable of institutional racism.

He literally just said if someone white is being subjected to racism that they are no longer white.

I mean, the fact someone can say that with a straight face is ridiculous.
---

Corrik posted...

Cera really can't complain about ulti or vlado anymore.

Not even close.
---

Corrik posted...

He literally just said if someone white is being subjected to racism that they are no longer white.

"Literally" didn't and only furthering my point about your dishonesty.
---

CeraSeptem posted...

Corrik posted...

He literally just said if someone white is being subjected to racism that they are no longer white.

"Literally" didn't and only furthering my point about your dishonesty.

Aren't you Kenri?
---

Why the fuck would I be Kenri?

I just referenced the guy in my last post!
---

CeraSeptem posted...

Why the fuck would I be Kenri?

I just referenced the guy in my last post!

Figured there couldn't be more than 1 person as ridiculous as Kenri on this board so yinz were just the same person.
---

charmander6000 posted...

While what you are saying is true you also sound like you are arguing only white people are capable of institutional racism.

CeraSeptem posted...

In fact, as Kenri points out above, what they are saying (in the proper context) isn't even true. Wow, that was easy.

But hey you see what I'm mostly saying so I'm calling it a win. Corrik will always Corrik but it looks like someone fucking got it. Ace.
---