Jeebus

http://www.cnn.com/2017/08/17/politics/trump-approvers-never-stop-approving-poll/index.html

I get Jedha and Jakku confused.

Accidental Courtesy. A political documentary about an African-American blues musician that set out to befriend those who hated him most. Very well shot and directed. It touches on all kinds of topics; from the history of Rock and Country, to Confederate statues, to the Baltimore protests. I enjoyed it quite a bit, and it’s on Netflix.

Related;

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/noam-chomsky-antifa-is-a-major-gift-to-the-right/article/2631786

I think it could be argued that Antifa is technically leftist; they are, for the most part, Anarcho-Communists. That said, they aren’t leftists in the traditional sense, and they aren’t at all liberals.

Personally I don’t think Trump was that far off with the violence on “many sides” comment. Obviously most of the violence in Charlottesville was committed by the right (as far as I’m aware), but we shouldn’t allow Antifa to be painted as innocent, totally peaceful counter-protesters. They aren’t; and the longer it takes for the left to acknowledge the existence of Antifa; the more the misconception of their being left-wing is allowed to grow. The mainstream left needs to totally disavow Antifa and make it known that they anarchists first, leftists second.

Warbler said:

You know, I bet some think it is wrong to call someone who actually can’t see colors, colorblind, because now the word has “racial connotations”.

Find me someone who really thinks that and I will pay you 3000 Disney Dollars.

http://originaltrilogy.com/topic/Is-a-Star-Wars-movie-your-favorite-movie/id/51793 😉

To answer the question, though; I could never name any one movie to be my all time favorite movie. I will say that when I think of movies that I really like, Star Wars usually isn’t the first to come to mind. Make of that what you will.

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Councilman Carl Stokes is a moron. Calling someone a thug nowhere near the same as calling them the n-word.

If saying that is lecturing black people and policing the opinions of black people, I don’t give a damn.

One is a racial slur, the other is not.

“Thug” can have racial connotations and can be used as a slur, whether you give a damn or not.

how does thug have a racial connotation?

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug

ok, I am totally confused.

This isn’t exactly what the article says, this is just my own interpretation of it. Hopefully it help, or maybe it won’t.

Around the late 80s and early 90s, with the rise of gangster rap, the word ‘thug’ was “co-opted” by the black community, much like the n-word was years before. It took on a more positive connotation in the black community, with rappers such as 2Pac espousing the glories of living the ‘thug life’. The word ‘thug’ became linked with blackness. It’s almost the opposite of what happened with the n-word. The n-word was originally a slur against black people, but it was taken and molded into a term of endearment within the black community. ‘Thug’ had nothing to do with black people, but it too was taken and turned into something positive, something ‘black’, so much so that now when it’s used negatively, with it’s original definition in mind, the connotation of having to do with the black community remains.

Councilman Carl Stokes sure didn’t seem to acting like Obama and company were using thug in a positive light. The fact that black people might us it in a positive light, doesn’t show me how it is that when white people are using it, they mean the n-word.

Obama was not using the term in a positive light, that’s the point, that’s why Stokes had a problem with it.

So wait, Stokes thinks Obama shouldn’t use in a negative way, because Obama is black???

You’re colossally missing the point.

I think the point colossally confuses me.

I’m legitimately not sure what part of it does.

every part of it.

Are black person suppose to only use it positively? Does it mean the n-word when white people use it? When a black person uses it negatively has he/she broken some rule??

I don’t get it.

No to all 3. Black people aren’t “supposed” to do anything, nobody is. Even within the contexts where it may carry a racial connotation, I don’t think it’s on par with the n-word. There is no unspoken rule that ‘thug’ shouldn’t be used negatively.

all I was saying is that the term has come to have some racial connotations,

how? why? who decides this?

This was already explained. I give up, since I’m not convinced that you aren’t intentionally missing the point.

I assure you, that is not case at all. Until today I had never of any racial connotations with the word thug(unless you are talking about it in a situation where a white person is calling a black person a thug, only because the person is black). I have seen many times the word thug used to describe a white guy.

I don’t think that ‘thug’ has racial connotations in all contexts, but I think it definitely does in some.

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Councilman Carl Stokes is a moron. Calling someone a thug nowhere near the same as calling them the n-word.

If saying that is lecturing black people and policing the opinions of black people, I don’t give a damn.

One is a racial slur, the other is not.

“Thug” can have racial connotations and can be used as a slur, whether you give a damn or not.

how does thug have a racial connotation?

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug

ok, I am totally confused.

This isn’t exactly what the article says, this is just my own interpretation of it. Hopefully it help, or maybe it won’t.

Around the late 80s and early 90s, with the rise of gangster rap, the word ‘thug’ was “co-opted” by the black community, much like the n-word was years before. It took on a more positive connotation in the black community, with rappers such as 2Pac espousing the glories of living the ‘thug life’. The word ‘thug’ became linked with blackness. It’s almost the opposite of what happened with the n-word. The n-word was originally a slur against black people, but it was taken and molded into a term of endearment within the black community. ‘Thug’ had nothing to do with black people, but it too was taken and turned into something positive, something ‘black’, so much so that now when it’s used negatively, with it’s original definition in mind, the connotation of having to do with the black community remains.

Councilman Carl Stokes sure didn’t seem to acting like Obama and company were using thug in a positive light. The fact that black people might us it in a positive light, doesn’t show me how it is that when white people are using it, they mean the n-word.

Obama was not using the term in a positive light, that’s the point, that’s why Stokes had a problem with it.

So wait, Stokes thinks Obama shouldn’t use in a negative way, because Obama is black???

You’re colossally missing the point.

I think the point colossally confuses me.

I’m legitimately not sure what part of it does.

all I was saying is that the term has come to have some racial connotations,

how? why? who decides this?

This was already explained. I give up, since I’m not convinced that you aren’t intentionally missing the point.

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Councilman Carl Stokes is a moron. Calling someone a thug nowhere near the same as calling them the n-word.

If saying that is lecturing black people and policing the opinions of black people, I don’t give a damn.

One is a racial slur, the other is not.

“Thug” can have racial connotations and can be used as a slur, whether you give a damn or not.

how does thug have a racial connotation?

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug

ok, I am totally confused.

This isn’t exactly what the article says, this is just my own interpretation of it. Hopefully it help, or maybe it won’t.

Around the late 80s and early 90s, with the rise of gangster rap, the word ‘thug’ was “co-opted” by the black community, much like the n-word was years before. It took on a more positive connotation in the black community, with rappers such as 2Pac espousing the glories of living the ‘thug life’. The word ‘thug’ became linked with blackness. It’s almost the opposite of what happened with the n-word. The n-word was originally a slur against black people, but it was taken and molded into a term of endearment within the black community. ‘Thug’ had nothing to do with black people, but it too was taken and turned into something positive, something ‘black’, so much so that now when it’s used negatively, with it’s original definition in mind, the connotation of having to do with the black community remains.

Councilman Carl Stokes sure didn’t seem to acting like Obama and company were using thug in a positive light. The fact that black people might us it in a positive light, doesn’t show me how it is that when white people are using it, they mean the n-word.

Obama was not using the term in a positive light, that’s the point, that’s why Stokes had a problem with it.

So wait, Stokes thinks Obama shouldn’t use in a negative way, because Obama is black???

You’re colossally missing the point.

Stokes was exaggerating to make the point that the term has become associated with black people, whether we like it or not.

I associate it with criminals and rioters, not black people. It can also be associated with gangsters.

Language evolves. I have no doubt in my mind that you said ‘thug’ with only it’s dictionary definition in mind (I don’t even recall if you actually used the word), all I was saying is that the term has come to have some racial connotations, and for that reason I don’t really take the word seriously anymore.

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Councilman Carl Stokes is a moron. Calling someone a thug nowhere near the same as calling them the n-word.

If saying that is lecturing black people and policing the opinions of black people, I don’t give a damn.

One is a racial slur, the other is not.

“Thug” can have racial connotations and can be used as a slur, whether you give a damn or not.

how does thug have a racial connotation?

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug

ok, I am totally confused.

This isn’t exactly what the article says, this is just my own interpretation of it. Hopefully it help, or maybe it won’t.

Around the late 80s and early 90s, with the rise of gangster rap, the word ‘thug’ was “co-opted” by the black community, much like the n-word was years before. It took on a more positive connotation in the black community, with rappers such as 2Pac espousing the glories of living the ‘thug life’. The word ‘thug’ became linked with blackness. It’s almost the opposite of what happened with the n-word. The n-word was originally a slur against black people, but it was taken and molded into a term of endearment within the black community. ‘Thug’ had nothing to do with black people, but it too was taken and turned into something positive, something ‘black’, so much so that now when it’s used negatively, with it’s original definition in mind, the connotation of having to do with the black community remains.

Councilman Carl Stokes sure didn’t seem to acting like Obama and company were using thug in a positive light. The fact that black people might us it in a positive light, doesn’t show me how it is that when white people are using it, they mean the n-word.

Obama was not using the term in a positive light, that’s the point, that’s why Stokes had a problem with it. Just because Obama is black doesn’t mean he’s always using the term positively by nature. And ‘thug’ is not on the same level of or interchangeable with the n-word, Stokes was exaggerating to make the point that the term has become associated with black people, whether we like it or not.

I really dislike when news sites autoplay videos. I don’t want to watch a video; if I did, I’d be watching TV.

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

Councilman Carl Stokes is a moron. Calling someone a thug nowhere near the same as calling them the n-word.

If saying that is lecturing black people and policing the opinions of black people, I don’t give a damn.

One is a racial slur, the other is not.

“Thug” can have racial connotations and can be used as a slur, whether you give a damn or not.

how does thug have a racial connotation?

http://www.npr.org/2015/04/30/403362626/the-racially-charged-meaning-behind-the-word-thug

ok, I am totally confused.

This isn’t exactly what the article says, this is just my own interpretation of it. Hopefully it help, or maybe it won’t.

Around the late 80s and early 90s, with the rise of gangster rap, the word ‘thug’ was “co-opted” by the black community, much like the n-word was years before. It took on a more positive connotation in the black community, with rappers such as 2Pac espousing the glories of living the ‘thug life’. The word ‘thug’ became linked with blackness. It’s almost the opposite of what happened with the n-word. The n-word was originally a slur against black people, but it was taken and molded into a term of endearment within the black community. ‘Thug’ had nothing to do with black people, but it too was taken and turned into something positive, something ‘black’, so much so that now when it’s used negatively, with it’s original definition in mind, the connotation of having to do with the black community remains.

I can’t take the word “thug” seriously anymore because I’m just reminded of this.

yhwx said:

Earl YouTube links are much like DuracellEnergizer YouTube links: You should never click on them.

I clicked on it and enjoyed the video.

That came outta nowhere.

ChainsawAsh said:

and Anakin’s turn is done in the most family-friendly way it could have been done.

Gonna have to disagree on this point only. A main character being dismembered, then fried and thrown out a window is pretty hardcore. Not to mention the implied slaughter of children.

http://www.theonion.com/article/my-work-here-done-smiles-contented-bannon-bursting-56698?

Is it still the case that reports go only to Jay?

Warbler said:

Jeebus said:

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

Warbler said:

Ok, so it is.

Btw, what would you think of bare breasts in a G rated movie?

I don’t think MPAA ratings should exist at all in their current form, so…

Well they do exist.

If you’re gonna keep taking this stance of “doesn’t matter how things should be, it’s just how they are,” then I should remind you that this whole conversation was started because you think that women should breastfeed in private. And to that I have to say;

Warbler said:

You are entitled to that opinion. But this isn’t about what should be, but what is. Try to get it changed if you want.

Breastfeeding in public is legal in the overwhelming majority of states. If you’ve got a problem with it, feel free to try and change it, but that’s just how it is.

I believe I already agreed it is legal.

Then that ends the conversation, doesn’t it?

Warbler said:

DominicCobb said:

Warbler said:

Ok, so it is.

Btw, what would you think of bare breasts in a G rated movie?

I don’t think MPAA ratings should exist at all in their current form, so…

Well they do exist.

If you’re gonna keep taking this stance of “doesn’t matter how things should be, it’s just how they are,” then I should remind you that this whole conversation was started because you think that women should breastfeed in private. And to that I have to say;

Warbler said:

You are entitled to that opinion. But this isn’t about what should be, but what is. Try to get it changed if you want.

Breastfeeding in public is legal in the overwhelming majority of states. If you’ve got a problem with it, feel free to try and change it, but that’s just how it is.

TV’s Frink said:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/politics/wp/2017/08/17/now-you-can-see-what-donald-trump-sees-every-time-he-opens-twitter/?utm_term=.be85cfed92f9

I do not want that.

That’s why it’s so horrifying to me when Kennedy on Fox News says that diplomacy with NK is “sunshine, rainbows, and unicorns,” or when Ben Stein gets on there and says we should “drop the big one on North Korea.” That is pretty much Trump’s only news source, his only media exposure, and they’re constantly beating the war drums calling for North Korea’s total annihilation.

TV’s Frink said:

Warbler said:

DuracellEnergizer said:

Warbler said:

*sigh*

What is so difficult to understand?

breast on female = private part

display of private part = nudity

nudity not appropriate in public area, unless area is zoned for nudity.

Breasts shouldn’t even be considered “private parts”. Men can go around topless, so why can’t women? 'Cause extra fatty deposits?

Because white people and black people are different. That is the way it has been done for years. Go the average public pool, white people are allowed and black people aren’t.

You could have just have easily said this. None of it makes it right.

I was thinking about making this comparison too 😉