The coolest thing by far watching these Olympics is seeing the diversity up on that podium. Black, white, hispanic, asian, muslim, jewish...

US is kicking ass but that to me is where we really crush it. Pretty damn cool!

But you have zero proof. You're stating that you have enough proof, but yet you really don't have any proof. You have circumstantial evidence.

I have zero doubts that DWS once in that position helped because she and Clinton are friends and political allies. But that's not quid pro quo. If Clinton hires her to help in her campaign, it isn't quid pro quo if Clinton hired her because of DWS's skills in the area. You have zero proof that's why DWS was hired. You have zero proof DWS did "whatever Clinton asked her to do". You have zero proof Clinton asked her to do anything that broke the rules in the first place. None.

You are inferring every single accusation you made against Clinton. There's absolutely no evidence of any of them at all.

Clinton has zero insights about what the public thinks? You're kidding, right? The woman who was the front runner for the Democratic nomination, who has been in the public spotlight at the national stage for almost 25 years doesn't have any insight about what the public thinks?

Come on, man.

Also, DWS's job wasn't solely to ensure the nominating process was fair. She had a ton of responsibilities, and many of them she did well. That was my point. All you're seeing is the part where she screwed up because it hurt your preferred candidate. Her job was also to protect the Democratic party, and help Democrats win elections, too.

Perhaps a few might say DWS wasn't the reason Sanders lost? A few? You mean like.... ohhhhh, I dunno... Bernie Sanders? How about Bernie Sanders' staff members? But what the hell do they know, AMIRITE?

Dude, Sanders got crushed with minorities. You know where that can allow you to win the nomination? The GOP. Unfortunately for Sanders, he was running for the nomination where minorities are a significant part of the voting bloc. Absolutely CRUSHED. Clinton won 76% of the African-American vote. Before the primaries really began, Clinton was polling at 73% among Hispanics. You honestly think that was because of DWS? Let me put that to rest for you. Hillary Clinton did well among Hispanics against Barack Obama. Was that DWS's doing, too?

That's the thing. I have clear cut FACTS about why Sanders lost. I have the words from Bernie Sanders and his campaign staff. You have speculation about whatever small impact DWS's had on primary votes.

Valarie Plame? No, Bush never named her. It ended up being Karl Rove.

How did I shove Hillary Clinton down your throat? Explain that one to me. I didn't vote for Hillary Clinton in the primaries. In VA, I chose to vote in the GOP primary to do whatever I could to stop Trump, which was vote for Marco Rubio, as he was polling second in VA. I didn't do a damn thing to stop Sanders or help Clinton win the nomination.

Why didn't I vote for Sanders? Because of his lack of foreign policy experience, and he wasn't putting forth enough practical policies that I think would work. I like the guy fine. I'd vote for him as a Senator if he was in Virginia. I like having voices like his in Congress. But Commander In Chief is a big part of the job, and I want someone with foreign policy experience. He doesn't have that.

I also value flexibility in a candidate. The world isn't black and white. I like Sanders' values. It would be nice if everyone could go to college if they had the motivation. I very much think the rich are not taxed nearly enough. But I also think ideologies and ideals help to create ideas for solutions, but the solutions need to be practical, and I don't find his practical unfortunately. Sometimes they're not politically practical. Sometimes they just fall apart on the mechanics of them.

Gary Johnson has more experience? Uhhhhh, no. He was governor of New Mexico for 8 years. That compares well to Sarah Palin. Do you think Palin is more experienced than Clinton, too? Johnson has zero foreign policy experience. Hillary Clinton was an active first lady who proposed Health Care Reform, got children's health care reform passed. She was a US Senator for the short time of 8 years, which is way less than Johnson's 8 years as governor of New Mexico (wait, what?!), was on the foreign relations committee during that time. Then she was Secretary of State.

Sanders is the only one who I'd put in the ballpark, but he's had legislative branch experience only, and he doesn't have much foreign policy experience at all. Interestingly enough, you said he was the most experienced candidate, overlooking his complete lack of executive experience, which you favored when it came to Gary Johnson. Huh?

Clinton can't win? You know, I wouldn't even say Trump *can't* win. Once normalized from the convention bounce, she'll be the favorite to win. Sure, she could still lose, but I wouldn't bet against her.

Clinton supporters have blinders on only. Seriously? Dude, EVERY candidate has supporters with blinders on. Every single candidate. Most voters are ignorant, regardless of candidate. Don't give me that holier than thou stuff. You've got blinders on for why Sanders lost.

There are candidates who are threats if elected. There are incompetent candidates. There are competent candidates. There are great candidates. Sorry, but there aren't great candidates every election. I've voted in enough presidential elections to know you should be grateful to have at least one competent candidate who has a shot of winning. Sometimes there aren't any. Sometimes there are a few.

In your mind, I'm a Hillary supporter with blinders on. I'm not beholden to any party. I'm not beholden to any candidate. It's just not in my nature. This is the first presidential candidate from a major party in my lifetime that I felt was truly an existential threat to the US and the world in Trump. I'm a level headed person. Hillary Clinton has an astounding lack of charisma for a politician who won a major party's nomination. I don't find her particularly inspiring. I think it's a legitimate criticism to say she sometimes bends to the political winds too much. She sometimes doesn't handle things like the email thing like she should, as she flees to secrecy from a paranoia from the press and the other party, which is often a mistake, but you have to understand at some level why. She's a part of a major political party, which has a lot of "this is how the sausage is made" in every party out there, and she operates within that system.

If she were a meal, she'd be an unseasoned microwaved chicken breast, with broccoli, with too much salt on it to pander to people some to get them to want to eat it. And you wouldn't want to see how the chicken was killed. But you need to eat. Sure, there's too much salt. Sure, it's not drawing you to the table, but it's nutritious mostly, and you need to eat. It's a meal made of real food.

Let's go along with you thinking Sanders is SOOOOOOOOOOO much better. He was a perfectly prepared steak dinner, but it's lean steak, and lots of organic veggies, perfectly seasoned, and low salt. It's a masterpiece meal that the restaurant no longer offers, and you gotta eat.

Donald Trump is a plate of deep fried oreos. While a surprising number of people find that tasty, it also turns out the cream filling was contaminated with salmonella.

Gary Johnson looks like a better meal than the chicken, but you're told immediately if you order it, you're gonna get contaminated deep fried oreos or the chicken, and you have absolutely no say which it will be.

You can bitch and complain all you want about Clinton. But Sanders is out.

As Bill Maher would say, eat the chicken.

I'm not voting for Clinton solely because I hate Trump. She's a competent candidate. At least we have one to choose from who can actually win.

And I'm sorry, but I don't understand your comparison of Trump to Clinton. One of them has far more governmental experience. One of them isn't unhinged. One of them is clearly not racist or sexist. You would at least agree with that, right? Clinton, for all her warts, is not racist, sexist, bigoted, and actually knows how government works. To equate them is insane to me. I'm sorry.

And this is coming from someone who voted for Nader in 2000. I totally get voting for a third party candidate in some situations. This isn't the time.

Edit: You know who else is considering voting for Clinton? Penn Jillette, one of the most vocal Clinton haters out there, and outspoken libertarian. Even he is saying if the election is close enough, he'll have to vote for her.

"“My friend Christopher Hitchens wrote a book called No One Left to Lie To about the Clintons,” Jillette says. “I have written and spoken and joked with friends the meanest, cruelest, most hateful things that could ever been said by me, have been said about the Clintons. I loathe them. I disagree with Hillary Clinton on just about everything there is to disagree with a person about. If it comes down to Trump and Hillary, I will put a Hillary Clinton sticker on my fucking car.”

But he says he hopes the race will turn out well enough that he feels safe casting his vote for Gary Johnson, who is running on the libertarian ticket, and who he believes is the best choice."
http://www.newsweek.com/penn-jillette-terrified-president-trump-431837

To be clear, the situation appears to be as follows:

The police get a call about a person that may be mental wielding a gun.

Multiple police arrive on scene, where they find a black male and hispanic male.

The hispanic male is clutching something.

The extremely lucid and reasonable sounding black male identifies himself as a caregiver for the hispanic male, clarifies that the hispanic male is autistic, and that the item the hispanic male is carrying is a toy truck.

The black male does all of this, as well as trying to de-escalate the situation, while laying prone on his back with his hands in the air.

The police move in, at some point the black male is shot in the leg.

The police have full control of the situation, both parties are handcuffed.

Medical aid is not provided to the black male for more than 15 minutes. Not even an attempt by an officer to staunch the blood flow.

When the black male asks the officer why he was shot, the officer supposedly responds, "I don't know."

Now, let's examine this closely.

A gunshot wound to the leg could easily have nicked the femoral artery. I doubt the officers were trained to identify this. You can bleed out from seconds to minutes after your femoral artery gets damaged. A reasonable person might take off their shirt and compress the wound or use a belt as a tourniquet.

Before we consider that, really, we should look at one factor. If you choose to be a fireman, a policeman, or be in any other dangerous job, you need to be prepared to face actual danger. Being so scared that you might somehow, maybe, possibly get hurt that you proceed to jumpscare shoot someone who is fucking prone, is not being willing to face danger. It means someone joined the force to be 'better' than the rest of us plebes and not to face an iota of danger.

Also, if it was a white male, laying on his back and doing the same thing, do we expect him to be shot? The likely answer is no. I can't even believe that this was a likely shooting situation. At first, I suspected it might have been one shot that was accidentally discharged. That, while not acceptable, would have been plausible due to nerves. Three shots means three separate trigger pulls, that speaks to intent to shoot.

Luckily this man is going to live. He will likely sue and get a good chunk of money. If he had died, blood would have likely ran in the streets in Florida because one cop got scared that he 'might' be in danger. As far as that cop? He might lose his job briefly. Cop unions will do their best to get him back his job and will likely succeed. Let's be real about the possible ramifications of him going before a grand jury though. Even if he does, he will walk because the prosecutor will throw the case.

You don't need to link any angry man-hating feminist videos, and I don't need to link any angry woman-hating videos by people calling themselves humanists while threatening Anita Sarkeesian's life. We both know that they exist, and should ideally agree that this doesn't mean most self-labelled feminists hate men and most self-labelled humanists don't hate women. In fact, the vast majority of feminists and humanists don't even make angry videos on the internet.

Then you go into statistics on rape by men against women outside of prison and rape by men against in prison. This is a fucking horrible cultural phenomenon, and I discussed that. Above. You saw it? Yeah you did. But you wanted to make pretend rape threats instead, which fine, that's your deal, I guess. Nevertheless I can quote myself, again:

"if we concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of women by men outside of prison, I will also concede that there's a pervasive and destructive culture of rape of men by men in prison. In fact, I'll go ahead and concede that anyway. Which is fucking awful, but doesn't mean that feminists are wrong for railing against the situation outside of prison."

Furthermore - I gave you some quotes specifically showing you good sources of arguments. Not examplesof things men should tolerate or be fine about it. Quite the opposite, in fact. Don't pretend that I said that men should be fine with rape, because I never did. I said that just as white people have the privilege to shrug off inflammatory comments by BLM activists while still respecting the underlying movement, men have the privilege to be able to shrug off some inflammatory comments by feminist activists while still respecting the underlying movement. I am a little surprised that you responded with "I should have some people rape the fuck out of you" but okay, that's how you roll. If you don't want to go back on that comment - we'll just let it stand on its own, I guess.

As for Nicholas Cristakis in the video you link to, there's a shitload to discuss there, but it's much more nuanced and weird than feminism vs whatever.

- There's the weirdness of the role of a 'Master' and what it has come to mean at Yale. While I think the students are being unbearably unbearable, it would be a little different if they did it to a teacher rather than a master, who has a sort of weird guidance counsellor / therapist role. I don't know why that role needs to exist, or what it means in practice normally.
- There's the absolute insufferable pampered entitled gall and rudeness of those students which makes my goddamn blood boil.
- There's the question of racism and cultural appropriation at halloween (which started the whole thing) which to me is both a silly and difficult debate; I'm absolutely disguested by blackface, but I don't really mind if some four-year old white or black or hispanic girl wants to dress up as Mulan.
- There's the issue of job security in the academic world and what kind of protection Christakis has from fallout over a perfectly reasonable letter his wife wrote...

Those are all interesting, I agree, but I don't see what the video has to do with this one.

Back to the Future.

Married with Children.

The Simpsons.

Ferris Buehler's anarchist ideology towards his and Cameron's upper class parents. Handing over the car keys to the lower class joy riders.

The Goonies going on adventures to prevent a golf course from overtaking their upper class lifestyle.

Was Mikey about to become middle class?! Holy shit. The Goonies is about retaining your social position in order to fund misadventure. And the rise of the middle class Hispanic family! i.e. Rosalita discovering the jewels in the marble bag.

Everything from the '80s involving a family was about -- Anyone? Anyone? -- Voodoo Economics.

My black friend likes to talk about chicken and watermelon, and then we (group of friends/coworkers of varied races/nationalities/sexualities) ALWAYS laugh. Why do we always laugh? It's not fake or even nervous laughter -- he's just a goddamn funny dude; goes around doing a combination of Urkel and Denzel.

His story is the story of a black man that came to White/Asian Irvine California to teach the other races how to laugh -- and to pick up on hot Asian women near UCI. Sort of the opposite of the Hilarry Swank movie in all regards.

I've lived in areas of Orange County where it was very white and very racist, parts of the American "South" where it was very white and very racist, parts of Orange County where it was very hispanic and very racist, and parts of Orange County where it was so racially diverse no one really cared a goddamn what you look like, other than if you were a nerd or a jock.

Perception of racial issues depends almost entirely on where you live.

So I guess people like Rosa Parks were also tools? Perhaps Alice Paul was a tool for standing up for the rights of women to vote? I suppose Mahatma Gandhi was a tool for resisting British oppression and rule?

This is what you cannot seem to grasp, although I will try in the most basic method to explain it to you. Rights = GOOD, Oppression = BAD. Now, what does this mean? It means you have rights that are expected to be yours in a civilized society.

For instance, lets say you were Hispanic and in Arizona. Due to the fact that the Supreme Court allowed portions of SB1070, the 'paper's, please' law to remain in effect, you can be forced as a Hispanic to provide clear proof that you are a citizen in any situation as long as the officer has a reason to suspect that you might be an illegal immigrant.

The reasonable suspicion is entirely at the discretion of the officer, an individual who is not in any way psychic or specifically trained to spot 'illegal immigrants'. So let's say you are wearing a shirt that says Viva La Raza, just a saying that means you are proud of your race. If I was an officer, I could claim that you wearing a shirt with Spanish on it and being Hispanic could mean that you are illegally here. Ludicrous, I know, but I could claim it and get away with it the way the law is worded. I could stop you in the middle of the sidewalk, force you to submit to an ID request, and question you at the bare minimum. I could say a bulge in your pocket looked like drug paraphernalia and that you smelled of drugs, leading to a body search.

Now let me ask you, even if you were perfectly innocent, had no drugs, were not illegal, and were minding your own business, would this not piss you off? Assuming it didn't that one time, would you get pissed off when it happened over and over?

Look, I'm Caucasian and a male, and even I know that stuff like this is horseshit. At a certain point, if you don't stand up or support the ones who do, then when they come for you there won't be anyone left to help.

If you can't get the point and still feel the way you say, I feel sorry for you. Thankfully others do and even though you think they are tools, they will take the fall so you can continue to live your delusions.

As he goes on to explain, just like the "Hispanic men are rapists" joke and the "Muslims blow shit up" joke, this joke relies on exaggerating either the facts or our perception of reality. Case in point, Jenner was biologically born a man and decided he felt more like a woman. Now he literally needs to learn how to "act like a woman" because--let's face it--the majority of what we perceive as "feminine" is learned, acculturated behavior (how to dress, how to move, how to talk, etc.).

And yeah, all of those jokes are offensive--but so what? Why are we so worried about being offensive when telling jokes? If you honestly believe that all Hispanic men are racists or all Muslims are terrorists or all transgender individuals are "just acting" then clearly there's a problem. But how is there any harm in joking about these things?

The humor lies in exaggerating to an absurd level facts that are taken out of context (or put into an entirely new context). Every great comedian does this , which is why apparently great comedians like Jerry Seinfeld and Chris Rock don't do college shows anymore.

Well this is a very interesting video, because I'm trying to figure out wtf UTA stands for, I'm thinking it's Utah Transit Authority or something. So do they have a rule about not smoking on UTA property? That's got to be it.

I'm thinking these two male cops are thinking what a lot of male cops think, which is why the fuck did this little woman become a police officer.
But i got to cover her ass because she probably can't fight her way out of a wet paper bag. She probably needs to get into the DARE program so her biggest challenge is keeping 7 yr olds from putting boogers on her pantleg.

Of course, some women cops are pretty awesome, pretty fearless, and quite useful. Some, like I suspect this one, is pretty worthless.

I don't understand why they trespassed this guy from UTA property however. I just don't see how that's legal.

The whole interaction is quite irritating because I have to agree with the hoodie guy, nothing makes sense.

Which is fine as far as it goes, until he starts painting all cops are brainless gov't toads who sponge off the taxpayer etc etc etc. You lost me there, boss, because now you're insulting my avocation, in which I take a lot of pride.

Lemme give you an example of police work. Yesterday I helped a lady who had an auto accident, her brand new Mini Cooper got destroyed by some little juvenile driving a big ass Jeep Cherokee.

Today I assisted my Lt. with a neighbor complaint, some jerkoff who sounded like he had 18 Red Bulls for breakfast and wouldn't shut the fuck up had thrown a bunch of trash over a patio divider in an apt. complex because he thought his Latvian neighbor was making too much noise. Nobody got arrested, we were just there trying to resolve these two idiots from killing each other.

Then today I drove some old handicapped biddy 15 miles down the road so she could be with her husband who was having hip surgery. it took us a good 30 minutes to find out where the old codger was but we did it.

Two other officers responded to a family who called about their grown son who was off his meds and had a knife...we've been to this house dozens of times because the son is a fucking mental. I thought for sure this guy would get shot dead today, but turns out he was just arrested and transported to the PD for processing.

A couple of people got arrested for shoplifting, nobody got beat, they got a piece of paper with a court date on it.

etc etc etc

But no, this 'hispanic' dude has to jump to 15 conclusions about what ALL police officers do and it's total bullshit.

Dude, you're about as idiotic as these phony UTA cops.

So yeah, thanks for asking "why are white people seemingly MORE willing to be terrible shits to 'others'?"

[Just gonna leave this here: Research has shown that the brain has a very strong racial bias in response to seeing others in pain or suffering.

[Sidenote, this common "there is no white privilege, cause I don't FEEL like there's white privilege" problem is why i tagged @newtboy in a past tirade @lantern53]

But fer fuck sake white dudes, it's STILL racist or sexist.. even if you mean it ironically or sarcastically

Own that shit.
Without gloating or still somewhat mostly denying it.

Just say "Okay, so i'm gonna be extremely racist for a little bit, but i have an objectively valid point based on facts & data"


Seriously, white people can't comprehend and consistently deny how great they have it.. just for being white..

Yet somehow unintentionally & flagrantly gloat about how simple shit should be/is for the rest of us?!

As my hispanic mother would say "I dun bell'eeb"

I wouldn't say that. I think it's just the absence of witnessing that particular usage, which I wouldn't relate to your age.

I don't tend to see anyone fist-bumping anyone in real life.

Funny story (that my wife and I often chuckle about): I was fist-bumped exactly once that I can remember, but it's the why that's so funny. Employee at an oil change shop was talking to me and asked about my kids. I told him I have two boys. He then told me he had two boys. Then he, with all of his Hispanic machismo glory, nodded with a knowing grin and said these exact words: "That's right. Real men know how to make boys." Then he reached his fist out to me and as I guffawed with laughter inside and was perplexed by his infant-like nonsensical logic hesitantly reached up to allow the fist-bump to happen so as not to leave him hanging.

Now every time we discuss the fact that we have two boys either I or my wife will say with a straight face "That's right. Real men know how to make boys." and we'll give one another a deadpan fist-bump before we simultaneously bust up with laughter.

Genji you are a sad, delusional individual who is doomed to failure because you think you are surrounded by racists who stay up nights thinking of ways to keep you down.

It sounds like a mental disorder.

If I were a racist, why wouldn't I just come out and blame everything on your race?

Of course there is racism, but there is less racism now than at any time in US history. WE HAVE A BLACK PRESIDENT!

We have a whole nation of successful black people, hispanic people, asian people, jewish people.

Racism is your excuse.

But to get back on point, I don't believe that the cops are institutionally racist.

Baltimore, for example, has more black officers than white officers. Are all those black officers racist?

I stand with the black officers, not the antisocial thugs who destroyed that city, who destroyed private property, who targeted other minority businesses simply because they were not black..that's REAL racism.
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/other-racial-divide_946670.html#

You ascribe a whole lot of false narratives to me simply because I am a cop...that is a kind of racism. That's is truly prejudicial.

You can't show me one comment from me where I denigrate anyone based on their race.

smh

Yeah, I don't really plan out my responses. It's just what occurs to me. Just a lot of black superheroes, it's funny. I thought I did put black Heimdall, but alas my human error.

If you don't see how ridiculous it is to have an almost 1 to 1 ratio of black superheroes to ALL other races, not just white, I don't know what to tell you, buddy. It's an observation. Sort of like how in Walking Dead they introduce a new black character right before killing one off.

And, no I didn't mention anything about "token" black people, I'm talking about token Asian and Hispanic people, because apparently there's an equal number of black people to white but nothing else.

It's funny, just saying.

Hey Lantern, why don't you tell us how "totally not racist" you are..

while claiming that black people are inherently violent, underachieving, thugs & savages.

Oh but wait, you "have a bi-racial relative" so you couldn't POSSIBLY be an unapologetic racist.

Nope, you just believe the first biracial president is "unamerican" because he spent 4 years as a child in -*gasp!* - a "foreign" country.

[You know, like how Republican Ted Cruz is a Cuban-Canadian with an untrustworthy racist father]

Or maybe you can tell us how the "black community" conspired to make certain that open racism and discrimination in EVERY facet of life was perfectly acceptable until the 1960s.

Pssh, seems EXTREMELY racist to still benefit from the enslavement of an entire group of people..
- not to mention the whole murdering & subjugating the indigenous population beforehand -
..then blame that group for not being able to "fix their own problems", doesn't it?

P.S. - It does. Because it is. Because you're a racist.

Just like my hispanic grandmother.. oh, and she has TWO bi-racial grandkids.

@Mordhaus
Definitely not helping race relations by fear-monger.

If anything, more white people out in the street protesting would be a great thing.

It would show some of the kids that, there are many non-blacks that take these situations seriously.

White people shouldn't be afraid of being on the streets anymore than other people. Black, hispanic, asian, etc.

..glass panes on the other hand..

you guys might want to stay inside. = P