THIS IS WHAT A RACIST LOOKS LIKE
Apr 09, 201502:01AM
The clown at the top, that is.
Chu's post assumes that the only reason Brad would marry a black woman is to use her for political gain and cover. If he can conceive of marrying and reproducing with someone for such reasons, it means he's considered them. Racist.
There's no evidence that Brad has ever done so, but Chu assumes this must be the case. Why? Because he's a racist.
He assumes that the black woman is either too stupid or too gullible to recognize such a fact, and can't divest from it. Racist.
He seems unaware that she is both liberal, and possessed of a PhD in liberal arts. Or did he assume that wasn't possible because she's a black woman? If so, racist.
As a minority himself, he has no doubt experienced prejudice and bigotry, but is quite willing to use it as a weapon.
He's quite willing to use the black woman, AND THE MIXED RACE CHILD, to make his racist point.
That makes him a racist without any honor or decency.
And in fact, in a healthy marriage, the partners ARE each other's shield, sidearm, support and reinforcement.
But then, if you take your cultural advice from a former game show contestant, don't expect deep thought.
I'm not the oly one to see it, btw: https://twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/585707429473755136/photo/1
Did I Miss Anyone?
Feb 26, 201511:36AM
A man is drowning 50 feet from shore.
The local police will claim they suspected him of cooking meth, which is why they didn't try to save him but did shoot his dog, and congratulate themselves on going home safe at the end of the shift.
Bernie Sanders will Facebook meme that if the man had been at a job paying a $15/hr living wage, he wouldn't have been at the park drowning.
China would issue a statement that the drowned man was violating waters that were their traditional maritime territory.
North Korea issues a statement condemning the drowning as a Capitalist propaganda ploy and claims that every year, a thousand thousand North Koreans drown far more skillfully.
When Religion Goes Hilariously Wrong and Right At the Same Time
Jan 12, 201502:24AM
I posted this article, and several of us discussed it. http://www.alloutdoor.com/2014/12/16/question-open-carry-advocates-muslims-start-it/
Someone observed that many Americans really aren't clear on the difference between Muslims and Sikhs.
Hell, Mormons are closer to Muslims than Sikhs are.
My point was that thinking that "All those people in turbans are terrorists" is grossly untrue, especially as few Muslims wear turbans. That's a caricature that's wrong, and it's ignorant prejudice to think so.
I didn't pay much attention to the thread, but I got this IM a while later:
Chat Conversation Start
7 hours ago
I am done, sick of the LDS attacks, you cant clump LDS with Muslims. Im out.
Sorry you're prejudiced.
Now, let's look at it: They both worship the same god, they both eschew drugs and booze, they both have or recently had support for polygamy.
Sikhs do none of the above.
So, "Mormons have more in common with Muslims than Sikhs" is not an attack. It is a factually correct statement.
So fuck off.
Andrew Rowley said:
No they don not worship the same God. period... I see you for who you are a totally bigoted politically incorrect gun nut.... you only like to start controversy and will bring any topic into the matter. No hold barred. Nothing is sacred to you. You are so misguided in you pokes at religion. I' take the f comment as your final good bye.
I probably should be kind to him. If his reading skills match his writing skills, he probably has trouble grasping it.
So: What I said was, "These religions have some aspects in common, but the other two have almost nothing in common." Again, this is a factually correct statement.
Christians, Jews and Muslims are the Abrahamic religions, and use the same first five books—the Pentateuch. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy. It's the same god. They see Him/it in different ways, but fundamentally, the same being.
And, gee, I guess all these people must be "totally bigoted" too:
Jesse: LDS and Islam are both Abrahamic religions. Sikhism is an independent faith established in the 15th century without any antecedents.
Based on those simple facts, Mike's statement seems pretty accurate.
Adam: Andrew Rowley: Michael is correct, both Islam and LDS are Abrahamic faiths, Sikhism is not. So there are a few commonalities between Muslims and Mormons, there is essentially none between either group and Sikhs.
Oh—Andrew deleted all his posts. He didn't actually want to discuss the matter.
Adam: Andrew: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abrahamic_religions
LDS is a branch of Christianity, which itself branched off Judaism. Islam also branched of Islam. All three branches are considered Abrahamic faiths.
Please do your research before accusing people of not knowing their way around basic families of religions.
Abrahamic religions - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Abrahamic religions (also Semitic religions) are the...
Nikhil: Sikhism is its own faith but broadly aligned with the Dharmic faiths (Hinduism and Buddhism). Some consider it an offshoot, most do not. The Eastern faiths (including Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Taoism, and Shinto) have nothing to do with Western faiths and are built on wholly different philosophical premises.
The western faiths include Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. This is true historically, doctrinally, and epistemologically. Artificial distinction between Islam and other Western faiths is intellectually dishonest and well, silly.
Art: Andrew Rowley, I, too, am LDS. Our religion stems from a covenent from God as does the Muslim faith. The Muslim God and our God are the same God. It's how we gain approval of our God that things drastically change. Judaism is similar. The difference between Jews and us is that we believe Christ's first coming started with Christ's birth. Jews don't believe Christ was the Messiah. Muslims believe that Christ was an OK dude... but he was just a prophet. He was not Allah or any relation to Allah.
Obviously, you and I both know that things go in all kinds of different directions from there.
Sikhism is based off of none of the above. It is a practice and believe that is barely even theological in nature.
Mike is absolutely 100% correct. Islam is closer to the LDS religion than it is to Sikhism.
You need to ensure you know what you are talking about before you berate others, sir. Please use this opportunity to clean the egg off and let's get away from the Strawman.
(Wait, a Mormon is also an anti-Mormon bigot? How is that possible? Those evil fact things!)
Rick: The Christian God is NOT the same as the Muslim god. The Christian God is a Trinity - Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The Muslims view that as heretical polytheism. It is just plain wrong to equate them.
8 hrs · Like · 2
Adam: Rick: The Muslims, like the Jews, only recognize the Father, not the full Trinity. Allah (and YHWH) are in fact the same God, but only a part of the same god.
8 hrs · Like · 2
Steve (a Jew): Rick, whether you open your egg from the big end or the little end, it's still an egg.
12 hrs · Like
Greg: Wrong Adam. Muhammed CLAIMS they are the same, but they certainly are not. Muhammed was a plagerist of both the Old and New Testaments.
12 hrs · Like · 2
Art: Muhammad is not their God. He is their prophet.
The religions are both based from the same initial details.
12 hrs · Edited · Like · 1
Michael Z. Williamson Reminds me of a Catholic explaining to me how the Christian Trinity* is a trinity, but the Celtic trinity is only a trinity, not a trinity.
There ARE Christian sects who don't accept a literal trinity, considering it a metaphor.
So there we go. I'm sure we're all racist and this is Bush's fault.
But how can we have a proper discussion about Islam, when half the people out there don't even know what it is?
More next time.
Debit Your Privilege!
Jan 08, 201512:00AM
Privilege seems to be a serious problem in America. Or at least, a serious problem for wealthy liberal students at Ivy League universities.
I believe I have a solution. I call it "Privilege Bingo."
The first day of classes, all the freshmen, er, freshpersons, um, freshperoffsprings, will gather on the quad with their bingo cards. Each winner will be accorded a prize to reduce xir privilege and give them first hand understanding of the difficulties the lesser classes less privileged beings face.
"BINGO!" Our first winner! They will be deprived of all their scholarships and grant money, being required to work minimum wage jobs while wearing a placard proclaiming "I am a person of low privilege." The other students should be very careful not to microaggress them by offering tips or donations.
"BINGO!" How would you like to be a single mom of a mixed race baby? No? Well, too bad! You'll also be awarded pole dancing lessons. The bright side is you will be eligible for tips from upper classbeings, and cat calls on the street.
"BINGO!" And five cops come out, taze the winner while hurling insults at him/jer/it before dragging them off and roughing them up across the hood of the police car. They will then be stuffed into a cell for three days with no phone calls. Assuming they're white, of course. They'll be convicted of felony resisting arrest so all their resumes will be properly humble.
"BINGO!" They win disfigurement with a belt sander and knives so others gaze on them and are horrified. They'll have to endure the stares of others.
"BINGO!" Five Jersey goons will smash this person's legs with bats, so they're forced to use a wheelchair for the duration. To ensure the full measure, they'll be assigned to a third floor dorm with a shared bathroom. (Are shared bathrooms actually a thing in the Ivy League? If not, they should be.)
"BINGO!" This student wins the chance to write all their papers in Dgèrnésiais, with points deducted for spelling and grammar errors, to show them what it's like not to have common 6th grade literacy linguistic privilege.
"BINGO!" Gang rape. With video. This student is especially lucky, because the PTSD will affect all their studies for the year. As a bonus, five rednecks will be assigned to follow them around and crack rape jokes. If they're male, the jokes will be about turning "kwar."
This should improve the quality of education, with students deprived of unfair privilege and brought to a level playing field with their peers.
And remember: You can't spell "Privilege" without PIV.
Regarding Eric Garner---Words Mean Things
Dec 29, 201401:47AM
"Homicide" is a legal finding of death, and not the same as "murder."
There are only five legal ways to die--homicide, suicide, accident, natural causes, and unknown.
A finding of "homicide" means the cause is known and applied by an outside agent. That is all. It confers no guilt upon any party.
If one dies during the commission of a crime, the criminals are deemed to have performed the act, since their actions led to it.
IOW, Garner murdered himself when he made the stupid decision to ignore 6 cops using physical means.
I disapprove of the event, but the nomenclature is descriptive, not accusative.
Our President Needs to Read His History
Dec 22, 201412:01AM
My ancestors knew this game. They were experts at it.
It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation To call upon a neighbour and to say: -- "We invaded you last night--we are quite prepared to fight, Unless you pay us cash to go away." And that is called asking for Dane-geld, And the people who ask it explain That you've only to pay 'em the Dane-geld And then you'll get rid of the Dane! It is always a temptation for a rich and lazy nation, To puff and look important and to say: -- "Though we know we should defeat you, we have not the time to meet you. We will therefore pay you cash to go away." And that is called paying the Dane-geld; But we've proved it again and again, That if once you have paid him the Dane-geld You never get rid of the Dane. It is wrong to put temptation in the path of any nation, For fear they should succumb and go astray; So when you are requested to pay up or be molested, You will find it better policy to say: -- "We never pay any-one Dane-geld, No matter how trifling the cost; For the end of that game is oppression and shame, And the nation that pays it is lost!"
Is Ferguson Still A Thing?
Dec 14, 201411:11PM
A certain SF writer I blocked a long time ago, expressed the opinion, "If you're white, you're not entitled to an opinion about Ferguson."
Well, that's nice.
Dear Fascist, The First Amendment of the US Constitution guarantees my right and entitlement to an opinion on anything I want.
Dear Hypocrite, for someone who claims to support free speech and is in the business of it, this is about the 10th time I've heard you espouse limiting those rights based on your politics.
Dear white guy, you're whiter than cream cheese, so shouldn't you take your own advice, there in your 98% white upper middle class liberal neighborhood in California?
Dear racist, my skin color is not relevant to my right to talk.
Please go fuck yourself with a waffle iron.
As to other ignorant comments I hear all over:
"Why wasn't there a trial?"
There was. The Grand Jury is the first step in a trial. You should have learned this in 7th grade. If not, perhaps you should refrain from commenting.
"He only got shot because he's black."
No, he got shot because he was a murderous piece of shit thug, and white guys get shot for the same thing all the time. Google will find you thousands of them.
I have personally watched, in the black neighborhood I lived in, a shoplifter spill merchandise from his coat, then tell the officer who grabbed him, "You're just arrestin' me cuz I'm black." The arresting officer...was black.
Same officer asked a woman not to park in a handicapped space since she clearly wasn't and had no tag. "You're just hasslin' me cuz I'm black." It seems to be a default bleat with some people.
"Black people get shot more." Yes, but usually by other black people. As far as by cops, no, not really.
If you want questionable cases, Tamir Rice's murder is a good one to focus on.
There are two types of people in the Ferguson debate. Racists, and people who understand Brown was a thug attempting murder.
To the Law Students of Columbia, Harvard and Georgetown
Dec 11, 201402:33AM
If you plan to be a lawyer, you will lose cases, sometimes for stupid reasons, and sometimes because you're wrong. Rarely, innocent men are jailed. Often, guilty men walk.
This is the nature of our adversarial justice system.
I have noted your schools and your graduation years. Because if a case you're not involved with can cause you to freak out to the point where you flub an exam, you are emotionally immature and will probably be a terrible lawyer. So I will make sure not to hire anyone from that set to watch my interests. I can't have you panicking over some case a week ago and a thousand miles away when I need a judgment or a claim. Yes, it's stereotyping all your classmates, but without knowing your individual names, I must assume the odds of getting someone competent are not in my favor.
Congratulations, you've hindered the ability of your classmates to earn a living.
Stop shitting your panties, you whining little bitches, and harden the fuck up.
PS: Those of you so distressed are all white, middle class liberals, aren't you?
Dear femorrhoid cunts:
The women on Dr Matt Taylor's shirt can dress as they wish. You have no right to dictate their clothing choices.
Dr Matt Taylor can dress as he wishes. Just because you don't like the shirt doesn't mean he's "asking for it."
Likewise, cosplay is not consent.
Attacking him is slut shaming, and also attacks the artisanal abilities of the female friend who made the shirt for him.
If you think I'm mansplaining to you, you're wrong. I'm smartsplaining. Also, if you thought that, you're a sexist cunt as well as a retarded one. My sex is not relevant to the validity of my statement.
Instead of being bossy cunts and attacking your intellectual betters out of jealousy, why don't you go learn something useful, like how to make a sandwich?
Can't figure out why this is entitled "Equality"? Because a retarded dick male would get the exact same treatment. So suck it, bitches.
Everyone else, donate here: https://www.indiegogo.com/projects/matt-taylor-rosetta-project-scientist
Al Gore, Lardass And Eco-Expert, Is At It Again
Nov 12, 201411:28AM
Oscar-winning scientist Al Gore now wants "A national food policy." He refers to this "brilliant article" (Actually, it's an op-ed):
First of all, nothing in a newspaper is ever "brilliant." They're aimed at someone with a 4th grade education.
Here are the pallid suggestions:
All Americans have access to healthful food;
Well, gee, who doesn't want that? But you know, I've been helping a couple of recently homeless friends, and the food banks give away food. Now, a lot of it is starch, because we produce so much of it. But, it's food. Almost no other nation on the planet can do that. This is the typical statist bullshit of creating a panic over something that doesn't exist, making it mandatory, making you pay for it, then providing less than you had before, but at least it's "Fair."
● Farm policies are designed to support our public health and environmental objectives;
Translation: "Let a bureaucrat decide what you can eat." Because that's worked so well with health care, education and drilling for oil. Oh, and the US Postal Service.
● Our food supply is free of toxic bacteria, chemicals and drugs;
It pretty much is. And if it's not, you can sue or file criminal charges. Why, I remember just last week that 47,000 school children got gastroenteritis from bad school food and sued…oh, wait, no, they all ate perfectly safe stuff (other than being loaded with government mandated starch).
This is probably more anti-GMOtardery. Fun fact: Without GMO food, we can't feed 7 billion people. I propose everyone opposed to GMO stop eating. That will eliminate GMO, and provide enough food for everyone else, mostly poor people in Africa and Asia. Unless, of course, the anti-GMO crowd are mostly privileged "liberal" racists who hate brown people. Which they are.
● Production and marketing of our food are done transparently;
Because the government excels at transparency. Seriously, did these idiots actually say that? Why don't they ask for rainbow-colored unicorn jizz while they're at it?
● The food industry pays a fair wage to those it employs;
Ah, the "living wage" that destroyed Detroit. "Liberals" will never learn, because they are not capable of learning. What we really need is a national policy to declare "liberalism" (as opposed to actual Liberalism) a psychiatric disorder and put them in facilities where they can mumble to the walls and other inmates and not hurt anyone who matters.
● Food marketing sets children up for healthful lives by instilling in them a habit of eating real food;
Ah, "Real food." Which the USDA, which is run by...let me check my notes…ah, here: The US Government. It endorses eating gobs of starch that cause metabolic disorders, including obesity and diabetes. I even saw one recent report from this "US Government" that diabetics should get 70% of their calories from starch. The article concurs with this problem, but suggests MOAR GOVERNMENT will make it better.
Hint for the scientifically illiterate: Starch metabolizes as sugar. That's what it is.
What some of these tofu-munching pussies are hoping for is a law against meat, to stop those ebil, gun-toting, god-worshipping teahadis and make them comply.
Except California famously outlawed Caesar Salad a few years back, leading to literal bootlegging of salad. Once you put a bureautard in charge, it's hard to get anything rational to happen.
● Animals are treated with compassion and attention to their well-being;
Most farmers do this, because maltreated animals don't taste good. What this will turn into is more "animals are people too!" bullshit from the bunnyfuckers, and retards who try to feed their carnivorous pets weeds.
● The food system’s carbon footprint is reduced, and the amount of carbon sequestered on farmland is increased;
Wait, didn't you say you wanted the food to be cheap and plentiful? So: We will regulate the food and the farmers, require them to spend more money on wages, demand they comply with "Carbon sequestration," and it will magically be cheaper, just like health care.
Actually, though, this is potentially achievable—we just reduce the carbon footprint of everyone in favor of this to zero, process them through a logchipper, then through a lime pit. We'll sequester their carbon and they won't produce any more. And, we won't have to listen to them. Win-win-win.
● The food system is sufficiently resilient to withstand the effects of climate change.
According to my research, the food system has withstood climate change for a half billion years. What we need to be concerned about is if it can withstand Al Gore, his private jets, his mansions all over the coasts (wait, isn't he afraid of sea level rise? Why would he have mansions on the coasts?) and his considerable bulk that is probably fed by cheeseburgers, not salad. The carbon footprint of his houses exceeds my entire block. The calorie footprint of his girth exceeds the local football team, and his bullshit quotient exceeds that of every cow in Kansas.
Even on an ephemeral basis, first we have to actually conclude what specific effects of climate change we are concerned about. If we lose a week of frost-free days in Canada, their wheat crop fails. If we lose rainfall, much of the corn belt suffers. If we lose a couple of degrees in another Little Ice Age or Younger Dryas, there goes the citrus crop. Then there's hurricanes, El Niño, etc. "Make it more resilient" sounds cute, but doesn't actually say much. And of course, doing so will cost money, which will magically make food more affordable.
We have a system in the US that feeds not only us, but most of the world, and so well we actually pay farmers not to grow food. But what this proposes is to raise the prices, reduce the output, and somehow, magically, cheaper! And as for all those poor people in Asia and Africa, who cares? Because at heart, "liberals" are racist, narcissistic, greedy fucks who only care about themselves.
And Al Gore is their spokesJabba.
So, we have an op-ed that's shallow, panders to the wrong market, does so poorly, and is endorsed by a fat albatross. Ultimately, though, the proposal comes down to, "Government stupidity got us into this mess. We need more government stupidity to get us out."
Or, you could stop "helping" and figure that since people have been eating food for 3 million years, they'll figure it out.
Coming next: A national policy on masturbation and heavy breathing.