It happened, it was halted, it's happening again. As long as lower education is so disparate between mostly white and mostly black schools, it's proper. Revamp the education system so all high school graduates have the same educational opportunities, I would support removing it again, but we are moving the opposite direction. No link required, I explained....but from the link you provided....
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/18/upshot/some-colleges-have-more-students-from-the-top-1-percent-than-the-bottom-60.html

Did you read the link you provided about the one place supporting a day of absence? Evergreen? Their "day of absence" was 100% voluntary, not enforceable and not enforced, contrary to your claim.

The reporter chased out wasn't chased out, he was confronted, and he had left the media area to interrupt the event by "interviewing" people who didn't want to be interviewed in the middle of the event. Trump's campaign has adopted this tactic and added violence, and often physically assaulted reporters even when they comply and stay in the media area. This particular event was akin to a reporter jumping on stage and insisting the speaker let him interview him then and there, disrupting the sanctioned event.

Um....this was a discussion of why people would vote for Trump, not what's happening in Canada. That said, you can't expect a university to give a platform to a person who would use it to degrade and denigrate the university and it's policies. I wouldn't expect a religious school to host atheistic pro-life lectures, and I wouldn't expect publicly funded universities to host anti inclusion lectures.

Duh...your alleged "whiteness" class was not defining whiteness as inherently negative, it was this....
CSRE 136: White Identity Politics (AFRICAAM 136B, ANTHRO 136B)
Pundits proclaim that the 2016 Presidential election marks the rise of white identity politics in the United States. Drawing from the field of whiteness studies and from contemporary writings that push whiteness studies in new directions, this upper-level seminar asks, does white identity politics exist? How is a concept like white identity to be understood in relation to white nationalism, white supremacy, white privilege, and whiteness? We will survey the field of whiteness studies, scholarship on the intersection of race, class, and geography, and writings on whiteness in the United States by contemporary public thinkers, to critically interrogate the terms used to describe whiteness and white identities. Students will consider the perils and possibilities of different political practices, including abolishing whiteness or coming to terms with white identity. What is the future of whiteness? n*Enrolled students will be contacted regarding the location of the course. And it was cancelled in 2016-17. Don't be dishonest, it will change my responses.

Not sure why you made up this falsely alleged definition of racism that appears nowhere in the definitions or class descriptions you linked, but you did. Calling bullshit....Again.

Critical Race Theory (7016): This course will consider one of the newest intellectual currents within American Legal Theory -- Critical Race Theory. Emerging during the 1980s, critical race scholars made many controversial claims about law and legal education -- among them that race and racial inequality suffused American law and society, that structural racial subordination remained endemic, and that both liberal and critical legal theories marginalized the voices of racial minorities. Course readings will be taken from both classic works of Critical Race Theory and newer interventions in the field, as well as scholarship criticizing or otherwise engaging with Critical Race Theory from outside or at the margins of the field. Meeting dates: The class will meet 7:15PM to 9:15PM on Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday (January 7, 8, and 9), and the following Monday and Tuesday (January 13 and 14). Elements used in grading: Class Participation, Written Assignments.

Not anti white/pro minority/white=evil....but an examination of how laws as written and enforced may (or may not) be an example of racial injustice codified in law, whether by accident or intent. Again, you misrepresent the facts to pretend a class that examines the roll of race in law is a racist class teaching whites are bad and blacks are good.

If everyone BUT Asains do poorly because they aren't offered the same opportunities to excell, then yes, we need to step in to UPGRADE the opportunities of everyone else, that doesn't translate into downgrading the opportunities Asains are offered. Derp. This bullshit is the same racist trope the anti equality side has used for years, it's just bullshit. Asians aren't penalized for being competent at math nor for being Asian....neither were whites, which was V 1.0 of that same argument.

Identity politics are on both sides, played hard by the right too, to the detriment of society.

Affirmative action got national pushback from the racist right the day it was described as a plan, and constantly since.

It seems you may be confused by morons who would tell you racism is dead, reverse racism is out of control. When white women start being lynched by black mobs and blacks get a free pass for breaking the law, come back and try again. Until then, you sound like a bully whining about getting a time out for punching a smaller kid because they're a different race and proclaiming the whole system is unfair to white kids because you had a minor consequence forced on you.

I think it's super important people recognize that Bob's point here is actually very correct.

A huge part of Trump's support IS reactionary against runaway liberal ideals.

The most blatant was on University campuses:
-Including race as a determining factor in your admission score as a 'liberal' ideal
-Enforcement of a race based "day of absence" where based on your race you were to be 'kicked off' campus for the day
-"deplatforming" people for having dissenting opinions
-The entire circle-jerk of intersectionalism:
---"whiteness" needs to be defined as something inherently negative
---"Racism" needs to redefined as not simply racial prejudice, but racial prejudice PLUS power(you know, so only white people can be racist under the new definition)
---"systemic racism" getting defined as anything with unequal outcomes, so if asian students do too well in math it must mean the system is favouring them and we need to step in

All of that filth was and still is almost universally wide spread through Academia as 'liberal' good ideas.

People need to very seriously wake up and recognize how many of the quiet folks who openly detest Trump, are also going to silently still vote Republican because of their disgust and push back at the above ideals.

Congratulations! Your video, The Largest Star in the Universe – Size Comparison, has reached the #1 spot in the current Top 15 New Videos listing. This is a very difficult thing to accomplish but you managed to pull it off. For your contribution you have been awarded 2 Power Points.

This achievement has earned you your "Golden One" Level 58 Badge!

Your video, The Largest Star in the Universe – Size Comparison, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

The video I agree....my calculations show his newest stated plan, herd mentality (immunity), "that's going to happen", leads to 7-8 million dead at a best case miraculously perfect execution, and in reality more likely >40->50 million due to an overburdened medical system. I don't have a clue where they get such a lowballed estimate as 3 million. I'm with you there....Shame.

The data for what I sent is at John Hopkins university, the NPR data source is listed, statistica requires a free account, but their data matches Hopkins.

You told me, don't you remember?! You don't support me so that can't be it, and no...no pedo....who do you support? That guy who hollas at 10 year olds in public, lusting hard. Who was that guy again? He raped a 13year old at least once....it's on the tip of my tongue...help me out...who is that?

So, if I were a pedophile, that would explain how I know you support them. No denial though. Hmmmm. That's a public admission Bobby, Duh.

Hmmmm...ok, that's not legislation but is what I meant. A forced buyback program is going to have issues.

1) I have no problem with companies having to answer for injuries caused by the prescribed, advertised proper use of their product. If shoes were sold as having the greatest shin kicking power, doing the most damage when you kick someone, shoe manufacturers should be sued by those who get kicked. If manufacturers haven't modeled and advertised in a way that suggests dangerous uses, the suits will lose. Lawyers don't take loser cases, so it won't be an issue imo. Special protections from liability are a problem imo.

2) I've never understood the endgame there. What is an assault rifle, and how are their capabilities special? That said, no one is clamoring for Uzis to come back. Without a legitimate reason for high capacity fast shooting rifles, and no attempts to ban semi auto rifles, I'm just not that bothered by it, but I do think it's placating not meaningful legislation.

3) I have zero issues with registration or background checks. That seems the right way to deal with "assault rifles". There's no reason it should be expensive or time consuming if records are up to date. If they make it expensive as a tax disincentive against ownership, I have a problem. Shooting isn't a cheap sport, $10-20 a year shouldn't bother those who spent $2k on one rifle.

4) No issue at all with voluntary buy backs. Involuntary buybacks are going to be a legal and practical nightmare.

5) one purchase per month, a bit much. One purchase at a time, I'm ok with, that's 3 a month, right? I'm suspicious of anyone who needs multiple guns quick before they calm down.

6) I'm all for universal background checks. I don't want nutjob and violent criminals buying guns they aren't allowed to own.

7) I'm all for not allowing those who can't handle day to day existence to buy guns. I'm even ok with TEMPORARY removal of their guns in some cases, but only if they're returned immediately after they're deemed competent.

misdemeanor hate crime? I thought hate crime was an enhancement charge that took a misdemeanor up to felony level. I'm definitely against taking gun rights away permanently for misdemeanors.

9) dunno what that is.

10) the problem is you can buy a receiver that needs to be finished, as little as one tiny drill hole is enough, with no serial number or registration. It's just a chunk of metal until it's finished. No problem with a background check for every purchase, but a maximum of one check per month seems a reasonable compromise.

11) with proper oversight and a system that ensures it's not abused, no problem for me.

12) Yes, strict guidelines and quick return seem necessary. 48 hours without a doctor stating it's necessary would work, but as of now they aren't ready for prime time on that it seems.

13) had that in cali forever, not an issue yet.

14) as designed, smart guns wouldn't be hackable, there's no reason for wireless connectivity. Battery? Make it charge itself by shaking it like some flashlights? I like the idea that guns can only be used by the owner, solves so many issues, mainly being shot with your own gun.

15) depends on what constitutes "safe". I agree, guns for home defense need to be available quickly.

16) some ghost guns are milled on professional cnc mills but unfinished. 3d printed guns, I'm not a fan. 3 shots is plenty to murder someone, and with no identification it's a near perfect weapon for crimes.
3d printing is advancing constantly. You can print in metal with fine details now on home equipment. I think it won't be long before stable guns can be printed if they aren't already.

Thanks for doing the research. I seriously doubt most could pass even a democratic congress but some would, and most won't pass court challenges, but I understand your reluctance to put that to the test.

If you're going to fight the swamp thing, I won't argue against leaving a few snakes in the black lagoon. Some opposition is healthy, but the ability to be obstructionist on every idea is gridlock. I don't see it getting better.

I would go hunting for the videos, but Biden has already stated that he fully plans to empower Beto to be his gun control 'czar'. Beto has already said that he absolutely is coming for "our" guns. He plans a forced turn in or buyback of all assault style weapons, presumably those also covered by laws that allow them under federal tax stamps (full auto).

In addition, Biden lists the following on his website as his plans:

1. Hold gun manufacturers accountable. In 2005, then-Senator Biden voted against the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, but gun manufacturers successfully lobbied Congress to secure its passage. This law protects these manufacturers from being held civilly liable for their products – a protection granted to no other industry. Biden will prioritize repealing this protection. (Only this is misleading. Do shoe manufacturers get sued if you kick someone in the face? Do knife manufacturers get sued if you stab someone? Do car manufacturers get sued when you get into an accident? No and neither do most other manufacturers. Putting this in place means that any time a gun is used in a crime, they can try to sue the manufacturer of that gun into non-existence. It doesn't even have to be an 'assault' weapon, any gun manufacturer is at risk. The only thing that wouldn't count is blackpowder guns since they aren't classed as firearms.)

2. Ban the manufacture and sale of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Federal law prevents hunters from hunting migratory game birds with more than three shells in their shotgun. That means our federal law does more to protect ducks than children. It’s wrong. Joe Biden will enact legislation to once again ban assault weapons. This time, the bans will be designed based on lessons learned from the 1994 bans. For example, the ban on assault weapons will be designed to prevent manufacturers from circumventing the law by making minor changes that don’t limit the weapon’s lethality. While working to pass this legislation, Biden will also use his executive authority to ban the importation of assault weapons. (So this would be a perma ban on assault weapons and would also anticipate changes to circumvent the law. This would be the assault ban of 1994 on steroids.)

3. Regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. Currently, the National Firearms Act requires individuals possessing machine-guns, silencers, and short-barreled rifles to undergo a background check and register those weapons with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). Due to these requirements, such weapons are rarely used in crimes. As president, Biden will pursue legislation to regulate possession of existing assault weapons under the National Firearms Act. (So even if he doesn't get Beto to push through a buy back, he can force owners of assault rifles to be subject to the EXTREMELY restrictive NFA. Not only that, but it's expensive and would be a tax on gun owners yearly.)

4. Buy back the assault weapons and high-capacity magazines already in our communities. Biden will also institute a program to buy back weapons of war currently on our streets. This will give individuals who now possess assault weapons or high-capacity magazines two options: sell the weapons to the government, or register them under the National Firearms Act. (Covered this already. But if this does go through, you likely won't be seeing me on here anymore as it will be a cold day in hell before I surrender my guns or pay the government to be allowed to own them.)

5. Reduce stockpiling of weapons. In order to reduce the stockpiling of firearms, Biden supports legislation restricting the number of firearms an individual may purchase per month to one. (Once you get this through, it is far easier to get legislation passed to cap how many guns a person can own total. Fuck that.)

6. Require background checks for all gun sales. Today, an estimated 1 in 5 firearms are sold or transferred without a background check. Biden will enact universal background check legislation, requiring a background check for all gun sales with very limited exceptions, such as gifts between close family members. This will close the so-called “gun show and online sales loophole” that the Obama-Biden Administration narrowed, but which cannot be fully closed by executive action alone. (I can deal with this, just means you need to go through an FFL.)

7. Reinstate the Obama-Biden policy to keep guns out of the hands of certain people unable to manage their affairs for mental reasons, which President Trump reversed. (Not 100% on this one, but it isn't a deal breaker)

8. Enact legislation prohibiting an individual “who has been convicted of a misdemeanor hate crime, or received an enhanced sentence for a misdemeanor because of hate or bias in its commission” from purchasing or possessing a firearm. (Felony yes, but that already exists. Misdemeanor, fuck no.)

9. Close the “Charleston loophole.” (yeah, no problem with this one)

10. End the online sale of firearms and ammunitions. Biden will enact legislation to prohibit all online sales of firearms, ammunition, kits, and gun parts. (So if I want to build another AR15 I can't? Fuck that. You still have to get the primary receiver through or shipped to an FFL. Which means a background check every single time.)

11. Create an effective program to ensure individuals who become prohibited from possessing firearms relinquish their weapons. (I would be for this if it wasn't for the fact that it is one step away from the government outlawing guns. Once this mechanism is in place at a federal level, all that means is you are one vote away from having your guns seized.)

12. Incentivize state “extreme risk” laws. Extreme risk laws, also called “red flag” laws, enable family members or law enforcement officials to temporarily remove an individual’s access to firearms when that individual is in crisis and poses a danger to themselves or others. (Sounds good, but nobody is willing to state the guidelines that the family or LEO will have to follow. That means that it is completely up to family members and LEO's to decide what constitutes a 'crisis'. Bet you a lot of LEO's in protest states would red flag most protesters immediately if this law existed now in all states.)

13. Give states incentives to set up gun licensing programs. (This is above and beyond the federal checks. This would mean any gun owner or potential owner would have to maintain and pay for a separate gun license. Also, it allows states and locales to decide what constitutes the requirements for the gun license. There are already some states doing this and you have to get permission to even own a gun from the sheriff or other official. Fuck that.)

14. Put America on the path to ensuring that 100% of firearms sold in America are smart guns. (Are you fucking kidding me? What if the battery runs out, what if it gets hacked, or what if the government decides to flip a switch and shut them all down? I'll never agree to this.)

15. Require gun owners to safely store their weapons. Biden will pass legislation requiring firearm owners to store weapons safely in their homes. (IE, locked in a safe or partially disassembled, possibly a combination of both. Why bother having a gun for home defense if it can't be used without spending 5-10 minutes to make it available/functional?)

16. Stop “ghost guns.” (This is just stupid. 3d printed guns might be able to fire a few shots before reaching a critical failure. You can't 3d print a lower or upper receiver that matches a stock one. Yes, they made lowers for the original m-16s, but they swapped from those because they were shit. They broke constantly. And those weren't printed, they were molded from a tougher plastic. A 3d printed one is not nearly as strong. Either way, I don't care too much about this because it is a buzzword for non-gun people. Just like bumpstocks. You can still bump-fire a regular ar-15, the bumpstocks were just training wheels for idiots.)

Now he has a shitload more laws he wants to pass, but most of them I don't care too much about. I won't bother covering all of them. In any case, he is going to go after guns on a scale unseen to this point. If the dems get control of both houses, he will get these laws passed. Then the only hope is that SCOTUS votes them down as unconstitutional.

I won't vote for Trump, but I will be doing my part to maintain a split congress. Which means straight republican ticket other than Trump.

You think that's maybe because it's the 17 year old who murdered two people and injured one shooting into a crowd?

Could it be because protesters are fighting for racial equality and an end to police murdering unarmed citizens because they're afraid of black people, and the militias are fighting against that and for the preservation of monuments to racism and racial superiority?

You think it might be because Trump and his cult are condoning and encouraging his vigilante murders as a one boy posse, jury, and executioner, but authorities have universally condemned rioting and arson?

You think it might be because Trump believers have been itching for an excuse to shoot some liberals for years, they haven't been quiet about it either, and it's clear they see the crumbling law and order under Trump as their chance to spark a culture/race/civil war, and are targeting antiracism protesters openly now, repeatedly and nation wide?

What do you think is the reason?

The right is well aware of this, and are also aware that the black masks "antifa" used can be purchased anywhere, and lucked out when BLM often used them in their rallies too (thanks to Covid) so they were already subconsciously connected. It wasn't difficult for them to buy some black masks and clothing themselves, then commit crimes in the name of antifa at BLM events, so they did, most arrested for shootings and all arrested for bombings were right wing terrorists only dressed as antifa.
They even had manifestos outlining their plan to trigger civil war by instigating riots and committing murders and bombings and blaming their actions on antifa when caught.
That needs to be in the spotlight imo, so people understand the violent mob isn't just leftists, it's also Trumpists in antifa clothing and they're perpetrating (and attempting) the worst violence.

I agree about silencing offensive speech. The right way to handle offensive stupidity is debate it publicly, imo. Does the left at these universities not have access to intelligent knowledgeable people willing to contradict blatant racists or Nazis on stage? Do the universities not have a debate coach willing to moderate? Why not?
Just call Cornel West, he'll do it.

Thanks to BSR for having this posted. This is the sort of stuff that needs to get more airtime and eyeballs.

I think that pairs to the worst crime the left has been involved in related to the dumpster fire that is today. The entire notion of de-platforming or silencing 'offensive' speech, and that Universities have if anything been leading the way. Universities need to instead be having guys like the one here getting their views known more broadly, and then point out loudly what is considered bad and dangerous about them. More importantly, to also point out how closely it aligns with Trump and his rallying cries.

When the left could have been discrediting this filth, they have instead been accomplishing the opposite by actively rallying moderates to 'defend' the freedom of speech of these guys.

The passive majority has been watching for a long time as advocates on the left have used force and violence to disrupt speech they don't like. Now, cities are burning and despite it being for entirely other reasons, you have a lot of middle america only seeing the same angry mob of leftists at the same stuff again as before. Demand everyone do things their way or violence will be used. The worst/scariest thing to me is the Dems still seem confused by how people aren't flocking to them in the face of Trumps malice. They somehow can not fathom that there are an awful lot of right leaning people honestly worried that their only choice is between a Trump they loath in most everyway, but on the other side and angry mob of leftists willing to use violence on anyone that doesn't conform. If Trump wins the next election I'll be sickened, but also entirely unsurprised.

Ah, but that is Starfleet. Latinum is the universal currency in the Star Trek universe.

Sorry if I wasn't clear, kir_mokum. That is exactly what I was referencing.

More to the point - while I agree that the video didn't go there, the discussion in the comments did. The impact of religious ideas on every aspect of society is very real. Luck may seem like an obvious concept, but someone discounted it in favor of their belief that god has a plan for all things in the thread. Obi-wan was a cool guy, but his universe had some very different rules from ours.

I think the supreme court agreed with me (edit: apparently I'm wrong there, they struck down that part of the law), voters sure do.

IDs cost money, so are a poll tax if they're required to vote. Make them free, you erase that argument. Then you only have to solve accessibility.

Tens of millions of Americans don't have ID. Trump thinks you need one to buy bread because he's never done it, but has also likely never needed ID either...why would he?
If you're paid in cash and can't afford to drive, who needs ID?
https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet

That's the only thing you took issue with? That's real progress. So forget the mail in vote fraud fraud, and we're agreed that universal voting would kill the Republican party and they only survive by voter suppression.