|
General Random thoughts and ideas. "General" does not mean random drivel, nonsense or inane silliness. |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Display Modes |
#289
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
The only sensible way to begin is with a serious, calm, and patient desire and effort to understand. Neither BLM nor the calmer voices representing law enforcement are rash. Both, at their best, understand that the other has a serious cause that should be honored. Please don't talk about blame. Not who deserves it, not who doesn't deserve it. On a related note, it's also wise to separate different actors and different actions from each other. What happened to Freddie Gray was completely different from what happened to Eric Garner, and if you cannot take the time to look at the details, then you are doing a disservice to your audience (hypothetical "you") when you draw misleading broad connections between them. My 2 cents. This is probably off-topic. Though I will say that I thought Clinton's handling of this question in the debate last night was surprisingly thoughtful and subtle. I don't think I've ever heard any politician (certainly not a white politician) address race relations in such an articulate, compassionate way. And given her shortcomings - essentially, an absence of charisma and maybe compassion - I am as surprised as anyone that I'm saying that about her today. |
#290
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/nb/...s-liberal-bias Saying that a newspaper has a bias isn't a condemnation of their writers or editors. So long as the bias is understood, it shouldn't be a problem. Let me demonstrate with a wager. I'll wager that the New York Times and Washington Post will endorse Clinton for president. I'll also wager that the New York Post will endorse Trump for president. None of these entities are flying under false flags; we know what the bias is. How about a side bet on who Fox would endorse? What do you want to bet? |
#291
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
First of all, there is more to an endorsement than the name. Second of all, it is interesting that you ask that question during *this* election cycle, because this cycle is a fine demonstration that a newspaper need not endorse a party of the same candidate it did four years' previously. Across the nation, traditionally conservative papers are endorsing Clinton.
Why? Because sometimes it's just that the person is the better choice. I know I'm bumping up against your cynicism here, but it may be that the Times endorses Clinton this year, Obama before that, and Kerry and Gore before that, because in the genuine opinion of the editorial board, those are the better candidates. Regardless, though, there is this third point: it is important to distinguish between the reporting in the reporting section and the positions of the editorial board. I happen to think that my local paper's editorial board is just silly on some things, and I bear significant grudges against it for how it's handled some things I hold dear. But some of the Baltimore Sun's *reporters* have done excellent jobs in tough circumstances. Its editorial board is decidedly liberal; I don't think of the rest of the paper as "liberal" at all. |
#292
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
Those do not seem the sentiments of trump. |
#293
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
|
#294
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
I am not familiar with the Baltimore Sun, but I do know the New York Post. I'll wager that the New York Post will endorse Trump. Care to make a wager on who this (ahem) unbiased newspaper will endorse? You take the Clinton side. |
#295
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
Consider that, when police encounter a group of suspected drug dealers on an inner city street corner, the popular sentiment appears to be that the police should not get involved until they see drugs changing hands. But also consider that, maybe a week later, there will be a hypothetical community meeting at which the good people who have to live in that down & out neighborhood may very well be begging the police to be more aggressive in getting the drug dealers off the corners. What's an officer to do? If you lived in that neighborhood, what would *you* want the officer to do? The armchair experts on law enforcement are, IMHO, dangerous. I have no problem with informed & thoughtful protest. I do have a problem with people Monday Morning Quarterbacking police, like they would a football game, except it's not a game. One of my favorite speakers on the topic is Dallas Police Chief David Brown. There's a guy who can explain things simply.
Spoiler Alert!
edit: I'm just musing in this post. As far as I know, I'm not disagreeing with anyone. |
#296
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
Agreed. Honestly this is not a us versus them argument. I'm just pointing out that the next president should have ideas on policy to unite communities and help build trust between the police and the people they are sworn to protect. This is a major issue, with no simple solutions. Quote:
Also Agreed. Until I see something better than Democratic Capitalism I am still with you. However, Russia and other have tired a purely Socialist Government and unsurprisingly it failed. I think the Republican US is the only advanced country making progress towards a purely Capitalist Government (I could be wrong). This is one experiment I would rather not see take place, when we see a blend of the best of the two is the more rational way to go. My argument is that clearly the way the US is headed is not the best for the majority of the population, so wouldn't it be better to copy some of the policies of others that are working in other Countries. For example Health Care is a Right in Canada as much as my right to free speech and equality. I don't consider it a "nicety" and it would political suicide to suggest cutting that right. As a group of citizens we are happy to pay the taxes we do to ensure that right is protected. On the other side I consider it a privilege to own a gun, if that privilege was limited it wouldn't bother most Canadians. It all comes down to where your values lie. |
#297
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Going a few pages back when we were discussing traditionally republican leaning newspapers endorsing Clinton, thought this recent article was particularly showing of that point.
Quote:
|
#298
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Quote:
The media has, at last, more or less adapted to covering him, but he definitely achieved significant success by violating established norms of how a candidate relates to the press. Quote:
Quote:
|
#299
|
||||
|
||||
My Guess
Quote:
~Dysole, who thought it was one of Oliver's better videos My Twitch Channel where I play Scape and other things My YouTube Channel where the games get uploaded later Dysole's Draft Rankings Map Thread (Not responsible for psychic damage) Customs Battle Reports This sentence is seven words long. This sentence is not seven words long. |
#300
|
||||
|
||||
Re: Decision 2016
Just going to leave this here: http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/12220124?
It's an advocacy piece by a former "Bernie bro." |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
College Decision | Taelord | General | 16 | March 1st, 2008 10:54 AM |
Need some help with a girl decision | chief | General | 92 | October 31st, 2007 10:30 PM |