I'm not touching that thread with a ten foot pole, or any minimum wage threads, but as this is a videogame forum I like to use a videogame analogy. White privilege is playing a game at an easier setting, you can still die but there are hidden factors in your favor.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News
- Thread starter bananas
- Start date
- Status
I'm not touching that thread with a ten foot pole, or any minimum wage threads, but as this is a videogame forum I like to use a videogame analogy. White privilege is playing a game at an easier setting, you can still die but there are hidden factors in your favor.
thezerofire
Banned
and circumcision. it's like a pentagram really
And tipping.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Black people=Obama. Conservatives aren't even being covert about it, which was the point of the southern strategy.
cartoon_soldier
Member
As Chait said, modern conservative movement is rooted in white supremacy.
Lots of things are rooted in white supremacy, because that's the history of this country. The modern labor movement is an example. But it certainly seems like conservatives are more insistent about sticking with their roots.
cartoon_soldier
Member
They changed as you said. We are talking about the current modern conservative moment for sure still being rooted in white supremacy.
speculawyer
Member
Wow. This is very sad. Post-racial? Hardly. Apparently Obama made things worse. :-/
OK . . . movies are subjective.
Zimmerman . . . well that is tied with the gun porn fetish.
But Sterling? Sheesh! They can't even see it from the perspective of a businessman running the league? A very large number of the players and fans are black. And selling the team is not a criminal penalty and will actually make Sterling millions. And they don't agree to that?!?! Crazy . . . there is just a lot of spite.
zero shift
Banned
That many people thought that 12 Years shouldn't have won the Oscar? It was by far the best film of last year. What would they have preferred American Hustle (the film with no payoff)? The Wolf of Wallstreet (such a clusterfuck)? Gravity (lol)?
Wow. This is very sad. Post-racial? Hardly. Apparently Obama made things worse. :-/
OK . . . movies are subjective.
Zimmerman . . . well that is tied with the gun porn fetish.
But Sterling? Sheesh! They can't even see it from the perspective of a businessman running the league? A very large number of the players and fans are black. And selling the team is not a criminal penalty and will actually make Sterling millions. And they don't agree to that?!?! Crazy . . . there is just a lot of spite.
They're probably siding with Sterling because of free speech, privacy and all that jazz.
PhoenixDark
Banned
Wow. This is very sad. Post-racial? Hardly. Apparently Obama made things worse. :-/
OK . . . movies are subjective.
Zimmerman . . . well that is tied with the gun porn fetish.
But Sterling? Sheesh! They can't even see it from the perspective of a businessman running the league? A very large number of the players and fans are black. And selling the team is not a criminal penalty and will actually make Sterling millions. And they don't agree to that?!?! Crazy . . . there is just a lot of spite.
I agree on Zimmerman (although racism also played a large role) but with respect to the film, I'd love to know whether the poll was done before or after it won. I'm going to guess after, and the issue is that many republicans felt the film only won because of affirmative action.
It's amazing how petty some people can be. Is it really worth it to get upset over an Oscar win? It's not like the movie was garbage. It was a legitimate contender. Really shows you where some people's priorities are....
I will point you to the Crash vs Brokeback Mountain debate.
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
Wow. This is very sad. Post-racial? Hardly. Apparently Obama made things worse. :-/
OK . . . movies are subjective.
Zimmerman . . . well that is tied with the gun porn fetish.
But Sterling? Sheesh! They can't even see it from the perspective of a businessman running the league? A very large number of the players and fans are black. And selling the team is not a criminal penalty and will actually make Sterling millions. And they don't agree to that?!?! Crazy . . . there is just a lot of spite.
74% of republicans don't want discriminate against Sterling for being a racist or aren't sure, and 64% of republicans want to make it illegal to discriminate against gay people in the work place or aren't sure. Looking at it that way it's actually fairly consistent in being against people being discriminated against for their views, depending on how much of the 10% gap wants to honestly say it should be considered wrong but not illegal.
The real hypocrites are the oligarchical pundits and politicians who want to see everyone else held accountable according to the oligarchy's own racist and homophobic standards while also having no accountability for themselves.
And before you say anything, yes, I understand sexual orientation isn't a choice while being racist is a malicious choice and so it's not hypocritical for democrats to be for the ENDA and not for sterling. I am just pointing out that the party that doesn't agree with gay people still doesn't want them to lose their job over it.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Seems like useful supplemental information for workers to have. Would be easier to make people credit worthy or spend directly/cut taxes.
It's nothing new or shocking. A black president has made conservatives more conservative regarding race.
What I'm wondering is how they plan on paying for that.
Avon Barksdale
Member
Nobody leaves votes on the table like Republicans.
speculawyer
Member
Yeah, but most of them would say that conservative has nothing to do with race . . . and then point to Ben Carson, Herman Cain, and Allen West.
But they need to stop being in denial on the racist subset of their party. And it is not like something only associated with the old guard. It was Rand Paul that had his book ghost-written by the Southern Avenger.
I've heard people say that if people really had an issue with what Sterling thinks, then they should take it upon themselves to respond in Clippers merchandise and attendance, but they don't make the connection that the whole point of boycotting is to put financial pressure on somebody so they make changes... like banning Sterling. The NBA responding as it did was to preempt any such financial harm and loss of reputation!
NYCmetsfan
Banned
So a bunch of rich people are getting together to honor rich people in the city today. Otherwise know as the white house correspondents dinner.
I don't even think journalist even get an invite anymore. Its just celebrities and 'very important people' now
I don't even think journalist even get an invite anymore. Its just celebrities and 'very important people' now
Comments on some of the National Review articles about this (and Eich) are interesting. In general, they're not concerned that someone got fired (or whatever) for saying something offensive, but they object to bosses being "bullied" into firing people and some object to Sterling being penalized since he is himself a boss. But it's fine for a boss to fire someone if the boss just happens to find something they've said offensive. So it appears to me to be less about free speech and more about being concerned that it's not entirely up to bosses to determine acceptable speech. There's a feeling that liberal bullies have managed to confuse businesses as to the likelihood or severity of a boycott such that businesses aren't really responding to "the market".
This would be much less creepy than what it actually is. Also, Joel McHale?
NYCmetsfan
Banned
That's because I think it's far simpler than what gotchaye is making it out to be IMO. It's about defending the right to be racist. Its about defending the ideas. Maybe not the specific ones that were expressed so openly. The fear is that they share similar ideas and don't want to be punished.
TheLaughingStock
Member
Code:
Cut spending.
I wish if he was truly concerned about improving the employment situation, then the payroll tax would be a tax expenditure he'd like to rein in. Edit: I should add sarcasm here. ;D
T
thepotatoman
Unconfirmed Member
That's less confusing than G4 Attack of the Show's, Olivia Munn.
Honestly though, the less reporters at that event the better, no matter how it happens.
EDIT: Wait what? I assumed you were saying he was at the event, but Joel McHale is the comedian for it? That is weird. I was surprised at the fact that he would even be in the audience.
Link
The Autumn Wind
The conservative press is already ahead of you.
https://www.worldmag.com/mobile/article.php?id=29984
That's Olivia Munn?
You guys don't like the correspondents dinner? After how mean-spirited McHale was at the VGX this one might be really promising. Some funny moments have come out of these things.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Joel will be good. The best of these speeches are mean spirited. These people should be taken to task.
But my god CNNs coverage is horrible.
But my god CNNs coverage is horrible.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
Yeah, I love watching the speeches but everything around it is annoying as heck, especially being in DC.
I mean "this town" is ridiculous
RustyNails
Member
BREAKING NEWS: Joel McHale is making jokes
Agreed, Meyers and Colbert killed it.
Everything that wraps the event seems to be getting more and more ridiculous. It's just another excuse to connect money and power.
But I need them laughs. What time does the comedy start?
speculawyer
Member
I never realized how much "whitening" goes on in GOP politics.
Nimrata "Nikki" Haley
Piyush "Bobby" Jindal
Rafael "Ted" Cruz
I figured that was the case for Jindal, but wow at Haley.
Manmademan
Member
NYCmetsfan
Banned
You have no idea
speculawyer
Member
Next time I see some conservative say "Barry" . . . I'm gonna give him that list.
Joe Molotov
Member
Barry Soetoro
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
http://www.wthr.com/story/25423020/...ral-let-legislatures-choose-senate-candidates
Attorney General: Let legislatures choose Senate candidates
LOL
The Tea Party: Keeping the Constitution as originally written...unless there is a way they can manipulate it to their own benefit, at which point, screw the Constitution.
Attorney General: Let legislatures choose Senate candidates
LOL
The Tea Party: Keeping the Constitution as originally written...unless there is a way they can manipulate it to their own benefit, at which point, screw the Constitution.
Oh come on, they're so blatant.
The reason they suddenly want legislatures appointing senators is because it would give a Republican majority in the Senate due to states that elect Democrat senators in statewide elections but have Republican controlled state government due to how state level districting works.
The reason they suddenly want legislatures appointing senators is because it would give a Republican majority in the Senate due to states that elect Democrat senators in statewide elections but have Republican controlled state government due to how state level districting works.
Avon Barksdale
Member
Didn't hear about it, found that text -
"Corporations are not people. They have none of the Constitutional rights of human beings. Corporations are not allowed to give money to any politician, directly or indirectly. No politician can raise over $100 from any person or entity. All elections must be publicly financed."
While I agree with everything there, I honestly think that if you go that route you need to focus on killing corporate personhood, I think you can get an overwhelming support for that (and I'd like to see anyone mount a serious opposition to that).Also, I'm not sure how election can be both publicly financed and get donations of up to $100 from an individual.
Either way, good on them, I don't think it has a chance, but it's still a good exercise.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked