|
Some say the machine spirit program is an extension of the god emperor reagan.
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 16:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now? You say this like this isn't already happening and that the view isn't sort of acceptable in the mainstream. Shear Modulus fucked around with this message at 16:51 on Aug 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 16:49
|
|
|
Cornel West pretty recently came out against Al Sharpton for being an Obama shill. The short version is that West (rightfully, in my opinion) thinks that Obama hasn't even tried to hold up his campaign promises and thinks that Sharpton blindly supports Obama for being the first black president instead of for any actual policy. As far as I can tell it's mostly right-wing stuff (breitbart, fox) who actually reported that because there's nothing they like more than BLACK MAN CRITICIZES CIVIL RIGHTS LEADER, which sure is something considering West is a socialist.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now? If they start talking about worshipping the Omnissiah I'm in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 16:56
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:It says they might consider an appeal to SCOTUS, I'm not so sure that will work out with the current makeup of SCOTUS. There's a pretty clear loophole they can exploit. Just say that they have the right idea, but by not Mirandizing the defendant they didn't let him know that his right to remain silent existed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:04
|
|
|
The X-man cometh posted:To a lot of white people, Al Sharpton is the scary kind of black man, the opposite of Harold Ford. Especially New Yorkers, who remember a younger, much angrier Sharpton. To a lot of white people, Al Sharpton shits up everything he touches by adjusting the focus towards race instead of the real issues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
Pohl posted:I like Al Sharpton. No, he's definitely not a libertarian. He likes and supports Obama, but he's also one of those annoying "MSNBC is equally as extreme as Fox News!" type of people.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:11
|
|
|
computer parts posted:There's a pretty clear loophole they can exploit. Just say that they have the right idea, but by not Mirandizing the defendant they didn't let him know that his right to remain silent existed. But that's part of the CA SC's argument. By not Mirandizing him, he didn't know he had a right to remain silent and he was therefore temporarily in a world where the right to remain silent didn't exist. In this state, his silence isn't him exercising that right (since the CA SC found that by being unMirandized you can't exercise it without explicitly saying so), but evidence of antisocial behavior and an admission of guilt. Correct me if I'm wrong but this is my reading of the ruling.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:13
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:But that's part of the CA SC's argument. By not Mirandizing him, he didn't know he had a right to remain silent and he was therefore temporarily in a world where the right to remain silent didn't exist. In this state, his silence isn't him exercising that right (since the CA SC found that by being unMirandized you can't exercise it without explicitly saying so), but evidence of antisocial behavior and an admission of guilt. The CA ruling is "you have to declare your right to remain silent, regardless of whether we tell you that you have that right or not". SCOTUS can argue that "you have to declare your right to remain silent, but the police still have to inform you that the right to remain silent exists".
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
pangstrom posted:That's that sexperiment preacher... guessing he's basically the clickbait version of a preacher. That's like being a clickbait version of Huffpo. How?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Amergin posted:To a lot of white people, Al Sharpton shits up everything he touches by adjusting the focus towards race instead of the real issues.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
DoubleDonut posted:Cornel West pretty recently came out against Al Sharpton for being an Obama shill. The short version is that West (rightfully, in my opinion) thinks that Obama hasn't even tried to hold up his campaign promises and thinks that Sharpton blindly supports Obama for being the first black president instead of for any actual policy. The capitalized part of the second post is Sharpton's explicitly stated reason for never publicly criticizing the President. He'd really rather not ever hear Limbaugh open a show with "Even Al Shaorton thinks..."
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:26
|
|
|
Shear Modulus posted:But that's part of the CA SC's argument. By not Mirandizing him, he didn't know he had a right to remain silent and he was therefore temporarily in a world where the right to remain silent didn't exist. In this state, his silence isn't him exercising that right (since the CA SC found that by being unMirandized you can't exercise it without explicitly saying so), but evidence of antisocial behavior and an admission of guilt. Though of course you'd have to be living in a cave all your life to not know that you had the right to remain silent, not that it would matter because as I understand it, you have those rights at all times, even if you somehow didn't know about it. Your rights don't magically begin the moment you're informed of them, they're already there at all times and whether you know them or not and even if you don't specifically assert them. That anyone would argue with a straight face that you have to verbally assert silence, and that they were taken seriously and that very serious people agreed is very difficult for me to wrap my brain around.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
computer parts posted:The CA ruling is "you have to declare your right to remain silent, regardless of whether we tell you that you have that right or not". This conflicts with the facet (which the CA SC mentioned) that someone who's been Mirandized can exercise their right to remain silent without explicitly invoking it. Other than that I think I see your point if you're saying the SCOTUS can just say that everything pre-Miranda is inadmissible. ReidRansom posted:Though of course you'd have to be living in a cave all your life to not know that you had the right to remain silent, not that it would matter because as I understand it, you have those rights at all times, even if you somehow didn't know about it. Your rights don't magically begin the moment you're informed of them, they're already there at all times and whether you know them or not and even if you don't specifically assert them. That anyone would argue with a straight face that you have to verbally assert silence, and that they were taken seriously and that very serious people agreed is very difficult for me to wrap my brain around. Oh yeah the ruling is pants-on-head retarded, I don't think anyone's arguing that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now? It rather just seemed like the mainstream understanding of a Predator drone as an all-seeing eye hovering over the battlefield was a handy metaphor for God's omniscience and the article was just commenting on how drones have become so commonplace that they're being drawn upon by laypeople as handy metaphors. It's like when I was listening to a gaming podcast and they were talking about 'catch-up' mechanisms in MMOs and the phrases '1%er' and 'wealth inequality' came up as descriptors. It's entered the public consciousness.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now?  A few steps away, at least.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Bhaal posted:Another way of saying that is "race isn't considered a real issue to the people who get annoyed at Sharpton". Not necessarily. There's a middle ground between "race isn't a real issue" and "race is THE MAIN real issue". Sharpton drags every topic he wades into towards the latter while most white folks don't deny race is an issue or a contributing factor, it just doesn't have to be the only contributing factor for everything involving people of different races.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
Amergin posted:To a lot of white people, Al Sharpton shits up everything he touches by adjusting the focus towards race instead of the real issues. Well considering race is the underlying issue with almost every problem in this country,
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:37
|
|
|
nachos posted:Well considering race is the underlying issue with almost every problem in this country, I'd argue class and wealth inequality contribute more to almost every problem in this country than race.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:
We even already have the lizard people to play the role of the mutants in human skin.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:38
|
|
|
ReidRansom posted:Though of course you'd have to be living in a cave all your life to not know that you had the right to remain silent, not that it would matter because as I understand it, you have those rights at all times, even if you somehow didn't know about it. Your rights don't magically begin the moment you're informed of them, they're already there at all times and whether you know them or not and even if you don't specifically assert them. That anyone would argue with a straight face that you have to verbally assert silence, and that they were taken seriously and that very serious people agreed is very difficult for me to wrap my brain around. That's the thing, though (under the current legal interpretation) - you have the right to choose to remain silent in a very specific way. The fact that you have the right and haven't said anything doesn't mean that you have chosen that path, it means that you just haven't said anything. Miranda isn't a right in quite the way people think of rights - it's more of a series of ritualized procedures designed to protect your other rights (e.g. Fifth amendment self incrimination rights, due process rights.) You have to be informed of your option to take advantage of these procedures, but until you exercise that option, the protections don't actually apply to you. While I agree that it's a bad decision (or at least the reporting makes it out to be one, and Liu's dissent suggests the reporting is accurate), the idea that you have Miranda rights even before you invoke kind of misunderstands the entire concept of Miranda. You have those protections - but only if you ask for them. Same as right to counsel - you have the right, but you still have to ask. SCOTUS has previously said silence isn't invocation in Thompkins so that part isn't that surprising. It's more surprising that the pre-Miranda silence is being allowed to be held against the suspect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
My memory isn't totally clear on this (I can't remember what exactly was said by Tavis Smiley and what was Cornell West) but my sense is that both of them seemed pretty miffed about Obama even in 2008, and it seemed motivated more by that they didn't get in his circle or something personal like that. (Not to say his criticism back then through now isn't true)
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:40
|
|
|
Amergin posted:Not necessarily. There's a middle ground between "race isn't a real issue" and "race is THE MAIN real issue". Sharpton drags every topic he wades into towards the latter while most white folks don't deny race is an issue or a contributing factor, it just doesn't have to be the only contributing factor for everything involving people of different races. Comments sections don't support this.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:41
|
|
|
I'm thinking of making a simple excel sheet that lists all senators, representatives, and governors. I want to know if: They have a J.D., M.B.A, or other They went to an ivy league school Before I manually go make this myself going through wikipedia one by one, does anybody know if there are existing resources that would have this information?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:42
|
|
|
Charles Pierce wrote a good article the other day on Reverend Al that I agree with entirely.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Chard posted:This gives me the heebie jeebies. Like how many steps removed from just straight up worshipping weapons and technology are some folks now? We kinda already are, aren't we?  Gun good, penis evil, etc etc... CroatianAlzheimers fucked around with this message at 18:00 on Aug 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
We've only adopted one half of Zardoz's creed though, we need the other for it to work.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
made of bees posted:We've only adopted one half of Zardoz's creed though, we need the other for it to work. They already think two penises together are evil, it's not a big step from there.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
Stultus Maximus posted:Comments sections don't support this. Obviously the crazies who post on comments sections represent all white people, just like Al Sharpton represents all black people and Rubio represents all Latinos.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:02
|
|
|
made of bees posted:We've only adopted one half of Zardoz's creed though, we need the other for it to work. I think "The Gun is Good, the Penis is Evil" pretty well sums up American society, man. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Amergin posted:I'd argue class and wealth inequality contribute more to almost every problem in this country than race. And there is a wealth of data that suggests a main obstacle to implementing solutions to that inequality stems from the unwillingness (of white people) to extend those solutions to all (non-white people). We've had this fight at least twice in the 20th century, and the racists won both times. My first Amerigin response. I fell like a read (bad) poster now.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
CroatianAlzheimers posted:I think "The Gun is Good, the Penis is Evil" pretty well sums up American society, man. It's not the gun's fault it kills. It's not the penis's(man's) fault it rapes. Yeah they're consistent at least.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:15
|
|
|
Amergin posted:I'd argue class and wealth inequality contribute more to almost every problem in this country than race.  It's almost like I've seen this post before. Who can say where systemic discrimination against black people ends and systemic discrimination against poor people in general begins? The important part is that we address these issues in a way that doesn't make white people uncomfortable.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:21
|
|
|
JIZZ DENOUEMENT posted:I'm thinking of making a simple excel sheet that lists all senators, representatives, and governors. Ask Votesmart. It's not publicly available, but that info is in the database, easily sorted.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:25
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g7RwwkNzF68
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:30
|
|
|
JIZZ DENOUEMENT posted:I'm thinking of making a simple excel sheet that lists all senators, representatives, and governors. I've seen several articles with this breakdown, so I'd look for one of those and ask the author.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Amergin posted:I'd argue class and wealth inequality contribute more to almost every problem in this country than race. You can't possibly address race as an issue by ONLY focusing on class and wealth. Race is a fundamental building block of wealth and any other kind of privilege.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:37
|
|
|
anonumos posted:You can't possibly address race as an issue by ONLY focusing on class and wealth. Race is a fundamental building block of wealth and any other kind of privilege. But what if race realism?
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:41
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
Amergin posted:I'd argue class and wealth inequality contribute more to almost every problem in this country than race. Even accepting your premise it's more than appropriate for Sharpton to bring the focus on those issues where race is a the main contributor. When it comes to Ferguson that seems to unambiguously be the case-it's representative of racial discrepancies in law enforcement which correlates incredibly strongly with race. We can go back in this thread and pull up the studies demonstrating that black Americans are significantly more likely to be jailed as a percentage of people who have committed crimes crimes than white Americans, particularly drug crimes. This combined with our batshit prison system is arguably the most significant civil rights problem in this country. Now, I'm more of the opinion that Al is a talking head (seriously, since losing that weight he's begun to resemble a literal bobblehead) but I'd appreciate some recent examples of how he's done what you are suggesting here.
|
|
#
?
Aug 28, 2014 18:49
|
|
