Sign In

yhwx

User Group
Trusted Members
Join date
23-May-2016
Last activity
19-Sep-2017
Posts
5575

Post History

Post
#1106573
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

According to this video, £2.60 are saved per person because of the royal family. This is not to discredit anybody’s argument, just thought it’d be interesting to share.

Post
#1106533
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

No matter how you slice it, this is pretty horrific.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/ousted-fox-news-host-eric-bolling-19-year-old-son-found-dead-article-1.3482934

Former Fox News host Eric Bolling’s 19-year-old son was found dead Friday evening.

Eric Chase Bolling’s untimely death came hours after the network announced the elder Bolling’s departure from “The Specialists.” His ouster came after he was accused of sending unsolicited photos of his genitalia to three female colleagues.

The younger Bolling studied economics at the University of Colorado Boulder, according to his Facebook profile. It’s unclear how he died.

He was Bolling’s only son with wife Adrienne.
“Adrienne and I are devastated by the loss of our beloved son Eric Chase last night. Details still unclear. Thoughts, prayers appreciated,” Bolling tweeted Saturday afternoon.

Multiple reports said that the teenager took his own life, leading Bolling to tweet again.

“Authorities have informed us there is no sign of self harm at this point. Autopsy will be next week. Please respect our grieving period,” he said in the follow-up tweet.

HuffPost reporter Yashar Ali broke the news of his death on Twitter Saturday.

“Very sad news, Eric Bolling’s son, who was only 19, died last night. By all accounts, Eric was incredibly devoted to his son. Heartbreaking,” Ali tweeted.

Ali cited 14 sources who accused the network host of sexting in an earlier HuffPost report.

Post
#1106314
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

oojason said:

yhwx said:

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

On the subject of national anthems, The Star-Spangled Banner sounds pretty epic, which is fitting because America likes to think of itself as an extraordinarily epic country. God Save the Queen sounds kind of lame to me.

For those of us in the UK who don’t believe in God - or wish for the Royal Family as an idea to come to an end, it is very lame.

I suppose as an American I should wise for the Royal Family to come to end as well. But if it were to end, something would be lost, something special and historic. But I certainly agree they should be rendered powerless.

They pretty much already are. Parliament has all the power. They could abolish the monarchy tomorrow.

Post
#1106309
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

oojason said:

yhwx said:

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

On the subject of national anthems, The Star-Spangled Banner sounds pretty epic, which is fitting because America likes to think of itself as an extraordinarily epic country. God Save the Queen sounds kind of lame to me.

For those of us in the UK who don’t believe in God - or wish for the Royal Family as an idea to come to an end, it is very lame.

Why would/should God save the Queen? Why should he? Shouldn’t he save all of us? There is an inference there that promotes the Queen above the citizen.

Plus, it is quite a depressing turgid tune too.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34268442 - Why some people don’t sing the national anthem

Technically, the monarch gets its power from God (supposedly), so I guess that’s the reasoning there.

Post
#1106297
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

TV’s Frink said:

oojason said:

Warbler said:

oojason said:

Warbler said:

CatBus said:

oojason said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

If the people who sit want to help the cause for which they protest, they should do so in a way that matters. You can’t show solidarity to the BLM community by sitting unless the camera notices you doing it and the media jumps up and down accordingly. So I think the people who sit should be ignored, because it deflates their method of protest entirely.

It’s similar to how Trump wouldn’t have won the primary had he not been given all the media attention. Just ignore them, and their opinion becomes moot.

A player sitting during the anthem is so ineffectual you think the media should ignore it (instead of jumping up and down accordingly) - so it will deflate their method of protest entirely?

Erm… what?

Well, I’ve been trying to stay out of this one so far, but I think I can translate. I think he’s saying it’s ineffectual in that it doesn’t communicate the message you’re trying to send, not that it doesn’t successfully grab media attention. i.e. the media ruckus becomes about sitting and flags and whatnot, and not about your actual grievances, therefore it’s ineffectual.

I haven’t actually formed an opinion on the concept of media grabbing yet. It does seem to be central to the “Stay Woke” thesis – that unless your reminders that racism and brutality exists are adequately loud and outrageous, your protests will eventually turn into background noise and the media (and therefore the majority) will tune them out, fall back into a slumber, and think everything must be fine now. BLM has embraced this and while they’ve clearly gotten some backlash, the media’s focus on police racism and brutality has definitely been longer and more critical recently than during any recent prior protest movement, and I’d say police racism and brutality is actually much less prevalent today than in the years past when it was barely covered at all. So did BLM succeed with confrontational protest tactics? Or is it the fact that almost every citizen carries around a video camera these days and stuff can’t be explained away as easily as it used to? Or a combination. I really don’t know.

The thing I can’t stand about BLM is how the facts don’t seem to matter. They hear about a white cop shooting a black person, and automatically assume it must be racism and the shooting must be unjustified. No looking at the facts, no reasonable doubt. The cop is guilty until proven innocent in their eyes.

There’s seemingly a fair few assumptions from yourself there (unless you have facts for these claims?).

Just what I see on the news. I see them protesting police shootings all the time and not giving a damn about the evidence. Just take a look at Ferguson. The witnesses conflict with each other and the physical evidence at the scene is inconclusive, yet they still want to crucify Darren Wilson because they are so sure he shot Micheal Brown while he had his hands in the air surrendering.

So a few honest questions as someone who is new to this - in a bid to establish some facts…

Do the people in the BLM think and speak with one voice?

I don’t think they are fully unified under one voice, but there is a loose group.

Are BLM often factually incorrect (if thinking and speaking with one voice)?

not exactly. But I do believe many join these protests without having a firm understands of the facts of the cases they are protesting.

Would it not hurt their own campaign for change if they did not look at the facts (or facts known) beforehand?

it would, but they don’t seem too worried about that.

and then later were proved incorrect, and then repeatedly so - as to do so would surely take away the credibility of the organisation if it were continually proven incorrect, no?

the media doesn’t seem to care too much about proving them incorrect. The media seems to care more about sensationalizing these cases.

Does the BLM have a policy of automatically assuming ‘the cop is guilty until proven innocent’ - and if so where is this policy?

I think they have policy of using any shooting they can use to forward their agenda.

All this is not to say that there isn’t a problem of police brutality and with the how they interact with black people. There well might be. But none of these problems excuse presuming any cop guilty until proven innocent.

Ok, nice one - thank you for your replies.

YOU DON’T WIN ARGUMENTS BY BEING POLITE YOU WIN BY YELLING

No, you win by yelling “WRONG” and “NO PUPPET.”

Post
#1106251
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

DuracellEnergizer said:

oojason said:

Warbler said:

oojason said:

Others, especially those around the world (that are allowed to do so) have no qualms protesting against symbols of their own Govt or country when it is failing it’s citizens, or there is an inequality perceived to be taking place with no-little appetite for change.

You are not going to understand this, but America is different. Here you don’t protest the National Anthem or burn the flag.

Yes, you do (you as in the American people). It has happened, and will likely happen again.

Warb lives in the USA SE. All that unpatriotic stuff’s been edited out to conform to the founding fathers’ original vision.

I thought he lives in New Jersey.

Post
#1106241
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

oojason said:

Others, especially those around the world (that are allowed to do so) have no qualms protesting against symbols of their own Govt or country when it is failing it’s citizens, or there is an inequality perceived to be taking place with no-little appetite for change.

You are not going to understand this, but America is different. Here you don’t protest the National Anthem or burn the flag.

But you can. That’s what’s separates us from other countries.

The raising of awareness for a cause is one of the first and most important steps in the long, slow and difficult road to implementing change. Media suppression or censorship certainly does not help that.

raising awareness in such a shitty way does not inspire me to help them.

What is so insulting to you about kneeling?

Post
#1106238
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

and you know it is not just a “*song*”.

Sure, the song represents something. But your fetishization of the national anthem is misguided flag-waving. Why do you care so much about a kneel?

So now it is fetishization to respect the National Anthem? Bullshit.

Your rabid defense of it is fetishization.

Post
#1106218
Topic
Politics 2: Electric Boogaloo
Time

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

chyron8472 said:

Jeebus said:

chyron8472 said:

Personally, I think a football player sitting during the anthem is ineffectual. It’s less effective even than temporarily adding an overlay to your Facebook avatar after a crisis.

We’re talking about it though, I’d say they were pretty successful.

We’re talking about him sitting. We’re not talking much about police brutality. Case in point.

I talked about it. It’s you guys (mostly Warb) who would rather complain about someone sitting down during a song.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯

When he tries to get attention for his cause by doing something shitty, it is not going to make me care much for his cause. Besides, I am not the one they are trying to reach. I am just me. I have no power. I have no authority over the cops. Most of the time I vote more liberal anyway.

You have your vote. And your mind. Those can influence others.

and you know it is not just a “*song*”.

Sure, the song represents something. But your fetishization of the national anthem is misguided flag-waving. Why do you care so much about a kneel?

To the top