Thanks to far right extremist billionaire, Trumpist, and allegedly 1/3 owner of Fox News corp John Malone exerting control from his board seat, CNN has gone far right…no longer allowed to discuss “the big lie”, no longer to have any biased opinion shows (like all of Fox). He claims he wants CNN to be centrist (his actions belie that claim) and become the network preferred by Democrats and Republicans….as if that were possible, reasonable, or profitable. CNN will never be the preferred source for Republicans, ever, and it’s blatantly obvious all his actions are doing is driving away Democrats and independents.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/cnn-staff-fears-right-wing-billionaire-john-malone-will-turn-it-into-a-dumpster-fire
https://prospect.org/politics/altercation-can-cnn-actually-get-worse-apparently-it-can/
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2022/aug/24/the-changes-at-cnn-look-politically-motivated-that-should-concern-us-all

It is now becoming a “water boy” news outlet, carrying water for far right extremists with water on the brain.

That “uphill battle” sure has turned, hasn’t it? Guaranteed Republican wins are falling like flies. ROEVEMBER is coming for the treasonous right. Hide and watch.

I don't think the blood had time to penetrate the clothing he was wearing. I also believe each strike penetrated pretty well with the force he was using. I also think the owner is going to see some jail time.

The owner wanted the altercation by inviting the robber back into the store so he could get revenge.

Active Self Protection
Nevada Shop Owner Stabs Robber 7 Times In Altercation

The police did what they always do when they show up, they immediately put their hands on the black people, which will always escalate the situation resulting in more one-sided violence against the black people. This is why people call the cops. This is the intended result people have when they call the police. Without hearing any sides of the altercation the police chose to get physical and then proceed to drag the black people around. The police were wrong, but they acted as the system intended for them to behave towards minorities. The police will lose in court. The city will pay a settlement to these black women. And finally those who get off on videos like this will have their moment the enjoy another example of white supremacy.

Here's a true statistic to go with your white power propaganda numbers...in any random altercation between a black man and police where someone dies, 97% of the time it's the black man dead.

I disagree. Pinpointing the problem isn't very hard if you have some idea of where to look.

As someone who was 'coming of age' in my profession when No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and its successor the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA), I can provide some insight into how these policies have been enacted and how both have been detrimental to the public education system as a whole. The former is a GWBush policy, and the latter is an Obama policy meant to mend the original law, so both liberals and conservatives are to blame to some degree, but both are based on the same philosophy of education and teacher-accountability.

There are some other mitigating factors and outside influences at work that should be noted: gun violence, the rise & ubiquity of the internet, and universal cell phone availability, all mostly concentrated in the past 10 years that play a large role. Cell phones, for example, are probably the worst thing to happen to education ever. They distract, they assist in cheating, they perpetuate arguments which can lead to physical altercations, and parents themselves advocate for their use "what if there's an emergency?!?!"

The idea of "teacher accountability" is the biggest culprit though.

Anecdotally, I've caught people cheating on papers. A girl in my honors English class basically plagiarised her entire final paper that we worked on for close to a month. The zero tanked her grade, which was already floundering, and the parent wanted to meet. I'd rather not go into detail to protect both the girl and my own anonymity, but suffice to say, all of the blame for this was aimed directly at me. How? Well I (apparently) "should have caught this sooner and intervened." Now, the final in that class is 8 pages long, I have ~125 students all working on it at the same time. but my ability to check something like that and my workload are beside the point. I'M NOT THE ONE WHO COPY PASTED A WIKIPEDIA ARTICLE AND DOCTORED IT UP SO IT COULD SQUEAK BY THE PLAGIARISM DETECTOR (shows she knew what she was doing, IMHO). Yet, I'm still the one being told that I was responsible for what happened.

Teacher-accountability SOUNDS like the right thing to do, but consider the following analogies

--Students are earning poor grades, therefore teachers should be demoted; put on probationary programs; lose some of their salaries; and if they do not improve their test scores, grades, and attendance; be terminated from their positions.

as to

--Impoverished people have poor oral hygiene/health, therefore their dentists should be forced to take pay cuts from insurance companies. If the patients continue to develop cavities and the like, the dentist should be forced to go for further training, and possibly lose his practice.

I have no control over attendance.
I have no control over their home life.
I have no control over children coming to school with holes in their shoes, having not eaten breakfast.

@Mordhaus the part about money grubbing could not be further from the truth.

I'll be brief b/c I know this is already too long for this forum, but Houton Mifflin, McGraw Hill, Etc. Book Company is facing a shortfall of sales in light of the digital age. It may be difficult to blame one entity, but that's a good place to start. They don't sell as many books, but guess who produces and distributes the standardized tests and practice materials? Those same companies who used to sell textbooks by the boatload.

When a student does poorly, they have to retest in order to recieve a diploma. $$$ if they fail again, they retest again and again there is a charge for taking the test and accompanying pretest materials. Each of which has its own fees that go straight to the former textbook companies. See: https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/schools/testing/companies.html

In short, there is an incentive for these companies to lobby for an environment where tests are taken and retaken as much as possible. Each time a student has to retest that's more $ in their pocket.

How can they create an enviorment that faccilitates more testing? Put all the blame on the educators rather than the students.

That sounds a little tin-foil-hat conspiracy theory-ish, but the lobbying they do is very real: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/03/30/report-big-education-firms-spend-millions-lobbying-for-pro-testing-policies/?utm_term=.
9af18f0d2064

That, combined with exceptions for charter/private schools where students have the option to opt-out of said testing is skewing the numbers in favor of all of these for-profit companies: http://sanchezcharter.org/state-testing-parent-opt-out/ << one example (you can't opt-out in a public school, at least in my state)

@bobknight33 idk if i'd call business-minded for-profit policies "liberal"

Unless I am mistaken he has no right to stop and detain them. I agree that it seems unlikely that race played a role in the initial altercation (and who knows after that...) but really I think he was in the wrong the moment he grabbed the ATV. If he had a problem with the way they were driving the right thing to do would be to allow the Police to do their jobs and not pretend to be one instead.

You can't really say the driver started it for much the same reasons you can't be definite about their reasons for meandering in the road.

Buuuuuut....since we are all bein innanet jurors I surmise that the plebestrians had been obstructed traffic for some time. Mayhaps it was some sort of revenge play followin an earlier altercation or maybe there were just being dicks. We don't know. No witnesses have presented. I'd guess they turned back around because they had detoured to block the prolemobile.

Anyhoo. Fine for littering & obstruction of a highway for the wet muppets. Fine for use of a horn in anger or frustration and deliberate splashing of pedestrians for the dry muppets. JUSTICE SERVED. Let their stupidity go some way to filling a pothole somewhere.

I've been called an oxy-moron
Because I question which drugs our war's on
Why are there more drug stores than liquor stores
You can score on
The healers have become the harmers
They're just pharmaceutical farmers
What we used to call dealers
We now call doctors
I might be a seedy cynic
Cause that crack house is now a clinic
It's time they change the name of the oath to
The hypocritic or the parasitic

It isn't adder-altruistic
By over prescribing
How can we fight them in a [?]
I'll throw a proz-accusation
With a sub-keta-meaning
They'll say my fears are quaa-ludicrous
They should be ati-vanishing
With every demurr-altercation
They'll have a good xan-explanation
You're just cialis-tated
Cause we made your dick deflated

It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic

It should be doctors getting busted
For their klon-opinions we trusted
We're not the sinners there the ones
That served us the vico-dinners
I don't want to be an alarmist
But in that harmacy there's a harmacist
And those scrips are making us [?] minded pacifists

It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic
It's oxy-moronic

Don't think that I am being crazy
The medical industrial complex
Keeps us vi-aggravated and hard to come
Because of perco-sex
How can we hydro-condone
Their blatant misconduct
They don't care for patients
They care about pushing product

Are you oxy-moronic
For wanting your daily chronic
And making your mom's house hydroponic
You're oxy-moronic

I've been called an oxy-moron
For getting my metaphor on
Linoleum is the floor on
I'm an oxy-moron

It's time to be alarmed
We're not being healed
We're being harmed
Our country's being factory farmed
It's Oxy-moronic
It's time to sound to alarm-a
We can't put our faith in karma
We got a common enemy
And they're called Big Pharma

And it's oxy-moronic
And it's oxy-moronic
It's all oxy-moronic
It's all oxy-moronic

Daily chronic, now most of your house is, okay
"Most of your house is" what does that even mean?
He's turned most of his house into hydroponic
Why wouldn't he have turned all of it into hydroponic?
Well cause he lives there
"Now all of your house is hydroponic"
Most is sappy
Really? It's like saying maybe
How about "Now your mom's house is hydroponic"
Yeah! That's fucking way better
God you fucking woke up
Come on Mike, where you been
Where you been all month?

*promote

Is there a disagreement or altercation regarding the subject in the video?

Definition of controversy: disagreement, typically when prolonged, public, and heated.
"he sometimes caused controversy because of his forceful views"

All controversies contain arguments. Not all arguments are controversies.

This video discusses arguments. That does not make it controversy, or controversial. The content here is neither prolonged, nor public, nor heated.

Thanks for that explanation, @enoch. I do admit I didn't see it/remember it by the time I got to the end.

I don't agree with you or @newtboy about the pop in the mouth being okay though. It isn't a gender thing. If this was an altercation between two men or two women, to take disparity of size out of it, the pop in the mouth is out of line to me.

Walk. Away. MLK. Gandhi. My self defense instructor. All say the same thing. Walk. Away.

Or in the parlance of parents -- use your words. No hitting.

I know this is a big leap -- but we invaded the SOVEREIGN NATION of Iraq, because we were afraid. If we can't have the maturity to deal with one person on a subway, then it leads to not having the maturity to deal with larger issues.

Walk. Away.

@rbar
well,the man is obviously cis-gender scum.
he was encroaching on her "safe space" and derisive laughter is a form of violence,which "triggered" her response.so her reaction by way of eye-burning chemical deterrent is totally understandable.

she was just defending herself from the oppressive "patriarchy".

this just in:
a man who filmed having an altercation with a woman at a convenience store has lost his job.the company he works for,after being made aware of the employees behavior had this to say-"we hare at super PC mart have a zero tolerance for those in our employ who condone "rape culture".having been made aware of our employees abhorrent and insensitive behavior,have since terminated this mans employment.there is no room in our organization for men who would so callously disregard the plight of the fragile snowflake.his actions do not represent our ideals nor image and we humbly apologize to the victim".

um..not to be a nitpicker,but he didnt appear to be losing his shit over chicken but rather money.

still no excuse to terrorize the joint.
he may be a big boy but good lord was he leaving himself open,because thats how you want to start an altercation:arms back and face presented.

something more is going on here,possibly really good drugs with a healthy dose of booze.

maybe he is just dumb as a stump.

i mean..c'mon.
"hey,let me wreck the joint,threaten the patrons,smack around the help and i'll just wait here for the police so i can get my money."

yeah..that's gonna end well.

*quality

The bicyclist has a serious passive aggression problem. He's also a massive narcissist, every half-assed "incident" never goes to the police, it goes on youtube.

Staying "out of the door area" only makes sense when there's actually someone in the car he's passing. Doors don't just pop open by themselves. Just look inside the fucking car... He rides this way to piss people off. Notice how he crowds the guy when trying to pull into a parking spot before the altercation.

I wouldn't be surprised if this (getting youtube video of pissed off people) is the only reason he goes out on his bike.

And that's the issue right there. I think you and I are arguing about completely different things. In terms of the person who stole the photos and posted them, yes there is no middle ground--that person 100% committed a crime and needs to be punished.

However, in terms of responsibility of people for putting themselves in the position to be victimized, there is a huge range of possibilities--but often this range of possibilities isn't examined for fear of someone shouting "Blaming the victim!" The link I posted above goes to great lengths to point out that the criminal who commits the crime is 100% responsible for the criminal act (by virtue of having made the choice to commit it) but that the victim can in fact also have contributed to the crime in a continuum of ways starting with not at all (100% innocent, as in a child who is abused) to fully responsible (as in the case of a rapist who is killed by a potential victim in self-defense during the rape attempt--in this case the rapist becomes the "victim" of a shooting that he brought completely upon himself). There is lots of middle ground between these extremes.

Let's examine a simple case:

I am walking down the street in LA during the early evening in a neighborhood that normally has very little crime. A homeless man shambling past me suddenly pulls a knife, rams it into my chest, and steals my wallet which happened to contain several hundred dollars. I think we can agree in this situation I've no responsibility for this incident occurring. I could not have predicted it would happen and there is little I could have done to anticipate or prevent it. I am 100% an innocent victim in this scenario.

Now let's change the situation. I go down to Skid Row in the early evening and start showing all the homeless people there wads of $100 bills and telling them how worthless they are and how if they only got off their asses and worked hard like me they could have money too. Again, I get shanked in the chest and my money is stolen. Am I 100% an innocent victim in this case? It seems a bit absurd to say yes, doesn't it? My actions (choosing to go to an area that is not often policed, at night, alone, and flash money while belligerently accosting random people who don't have a lot left to lose) are directly linked to the stabbing.

Note that in both cases the person committing the crime is still 100% responsible for their own actions--they chose to stab me and steal my money. But in one case I clearly could not have foreseen or prevented the attack coming whereas in the other it was reasonably foreseeable that my actions were going to lead to problems (not necessarily a stabbing but at the very least some sort of altercation, unless the most patient and forgiving homeless people on Earth happened to be gathered on Skid Row that day). Does that mean the stabber in the second case should get a lighter sentence? No. But it does mean I have some responsibility for what went down and can be justly criticized for my actions. I can't hide behind the "don't blame the victim" catchphrase. I still deserve justice, though, despite being an offensive idiot.

Back to the case at hand.

You are correct, the woman did nothing "wrong" in the moral or legal sense, and the person who violated her privacy is 100% responsible for making the photos public. But I dislike the idea that because she's a victim of a crime, her actions can't be criticized. She might not have done anything "wrong" but she did indeed make a huge error of judgement when she decided to snap naked pics of herself and post them to a social network which is known for dodgy privacy practices. Given the state of technology today, one should be able to infer that there is a pretty high risk that racy photos are going to get leaked at some point, particularly if posted online. If you are okay with that risk, go ahead and post them. And if they are leaked, by all means prosecute the offenders. But don't expect people not to criticize you for gambling that nothing is going to happen, especially when there is plenty of evidence to believe the contrary.