Cry us more tears, Bobby.
Big Daddy Biden crushing the snowflakes.

Edit:Derp Bobby, every time you post some idiotic Murdoch attack piece about Biden you need to be reminded that he CRUSHED Trump without rallies, without hundreds of millions in commercials, without the complicity of the post office slowing down and losing ballots, without various fraud schemes, without any verified vote frauds. Trump lost despite having all those unfair advantages, lost in a historic landslide.

Every time you bad mouth Biden, you degrade Trump, who lost to Biden bigly.

Yeah, seriously, stone cold. He looks like a robot or a corpse in the thumbnail.

I wonder if it would be an unfair advantage for someone with cauliflower ear to compete.

It's already well established that Bob wants people to be treated unfairly, see the other accounts with almost identical timestamp that sock puppet brigade for him and then see our FAQ.

"Can I create or use more than one VideoSift account?
There is a strict rule of no more than one account per person, please. Abusers of this rule will be permanently ban hammered via IP address. Sorry."


I'd invoke it myself if the site weren't already lacking members.


It's really sick you know? They have these ideas, but it's all summed up with some general structure.

"blah blah blah, and THAT is why black lives don't matter" Idk what you see when you see this interviewer, but she looks like one of the people throwing garbage on the field in that Jackie Robinson movie.

Bwaaahahaha....
Sorry, I forgot anyone not a Trumptard ready to follow Trump and abandon the republican party at the drop of a hat is a RINO. You have lost your mind, buddy. Trumpsters are RINOs, lifelong conservatives, Republican back when Trump was partying with Clinton, decades before he switched parties to become a republican out of convenience, they are not the RINO, friendo.

Also, if you really could read, and really had read it, you would have read about the bipartisan commission intentionally including Trumpsters who had to be reminded that if Trump won they would have to convince many that he hadn't cheated, so needed to participate in the anti election fraud committee even though they didn't actually want it to exist.

What is that supposed to mean? Free and fair elections by any legal means is the American way, and the right thing. They are the foundation of any democracy. My forefathers died to secure the right to free and fair elections here. You're saying free and fair elections aren't worth the efforts it takes to maintain their freedom and fairness?
Free and fair by funding underfunded election offices, providing missing ppe, helping states send out applications for mail in ballots the Fed won't fund....you know, the kind of stuff Americans as a whole took for granted before Trump.
Trump and his cohorts went above and beyond trying everything imaginable to make the election as unfree and unfair as possible, the first president ever to work against free and fair elections in our country, I know it's normal in yours, Putin doesn't want elections at all.

It's like 10 poker players at the table and 2 collude to get new unmarked decks so no one can cheat...player 3-9 having no issue, and player 10 throwing a fit and claiming they're all cheating him, he really won all those hands he just lost, it's a fraud, he won't pay, and calling his crackhead buddies over to try to rob and kill the other 9.

Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

Hrmph, looks like your bullshit has run the gamut of newtboy's patience as well. Can't say i blame him. What blinders?


Is this the section you're referring to ?


"Though much of this activity took place on the left, it was separate from the Biden campaign and crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors. The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election so calamitous that no result could be discerned at all"


"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"
"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"
"crossed ideological lines, with crucial contributions by nonpartisan and conservative actors"

I'm trying to wrap my head around this. Did you read that and did your eyes go fuzzy and then your brain said "THE LEFT DID IT"???


"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"
"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"
"The scenario the shadow campaigners were desperate to stop was not a Trump victory. It was an election ... w/no result"

Did you read that, hit yourself in the face with a rolling pin, and then see "THEY ONLY WANT TO STOP TRUMP"???


HOLD ON, newt, gotta speak thenidiot language. I'll translate.


No collusion! No collusion! Hoax, the fake news media. Hillary! Hoax! Lock her up! Beautiful delicious wall. No collusion! Unfair!

------


Seriously though, newt I think you're missing something. You missed what he said here. Bob said that voters determined the election.

Singing in elvish gives an unfair advantage.

This is a "Thuggish morons vs thug" kind of situation though. It wouldn't surprise me one bit that the thug would open fire in multiple directions THEN ram away out of the scene.

That would be the easiest/laziest response though. I was honestly being unfair to the cop with the above statement if I left it at that.

It seems the cop was just honestly looking into a reported illegal racing/gathering situation. Situation quickly got out of hand and got ganged up by those cop-hating (or not cop-fearing at least) kids. Legitimately panicked, the cop wanted to extricate him/herself out of the situation. What to do? Ram out a bloody path, putting people's body or even life in danger be damned, of course.

You've got to understand that the cop simply WOULD NOT be thinking any of those people are "innocents" and act discriminately, feeling they "deserve protection."

Cops feel so empowered these days they can do anything and feel justified to do anything without risk of consequences for themselves. The whole Law Enforcement and Justice Department "brotherhood" is behind every cops. With that mentality, why would this particular cop NOT do what he/she did? Why would this cop care what happened to the people that got rammed through? I can imagine they would do all these things.

Besides, the cop have to assume some of them came packing guns. It WAS a legitimately dicey situation he/she got into...

The lawsuits.... anyone want to bet what portion of the blame the cop will get? I bet the verdict when the gavel drops is a big fat ZERO.

Want to blame the cop? Why not blame the System first? Since it's all too easy under America's law enforcement system to train even an honest-to-goodness, idealistic person to go from "I want to Protect & Serve" to "I can kill/main anyone for looking at me funny and call it police work."

This is just not "Shocking!" anymore. In fact, I don't expect any less these days of police encounters. Cynical? Of course, But how can I NOT be?

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.

Nice lie. Jesuswouldbeproudofyou.

Ok, I slightly miswrote, it's not a pure "no political statements" policy, it's a long term "no political campaigning" policy, so no political CAMPAIGN statements or slogans or advocacy of one candidate over another. I'll fix it since it confused you so, it was not meant to deceive so wasn't a lie....can't say the same for therightscoop.com, they're clearly trying g to deceive if they claim it was unfair or uneven enforcement of long term company rules.

The point is it's not being unfairly applied like the petulant child claims and you dishonestly stand behind, it's totally even handed. No ByeDon 2020, no maga, not even JoJo2020. Yes BLM, whether that's a black or blue "B". Maybe you don't understand that BLM isn't running for office, isn't a candidate, and isn't a political party....yet.

Social issues, even those that have been politicized, are allowed..
like blm or support for police garb. You can wear a shirt that says "VOTE", you can't wear one that says "VOTE BYE-DON".

• Trump tweeted in response to a photo of a slide leaked by a Goodyear employee that purportedly shows that “Black Lives Matter”-branded clothes are acceptable to wear at work but “MAGA attire” is not.

• In a public statement, Goodyear said that it asks its employees to refrain from political campaigning for any political party but allows advocacy for racial justice and equity issues.

Total unfair advantage. Guy's a total contortionist and like triple-jointed.

Seriously enjoyable to watch those flippin moves though.

Dayum!

The cause isn't united either.

Another part of the problem is you have a lot of people like @newtboy who really DO mean defund the police by the dictionary definition. Those folks are mixed in with the protesters who mean 'reform' when they say 'defund'.

That's all to be expected though when you see the systematic failure of the national police force that is out there. When the number of bad actors in the force becomes too many, includes sheriffs and their deputies, and sees various police chiefs and police union leaders(not toe mention Presidents) defending the bad actors, the people that rise up in anger aren't going to be a uniform centrally organized entity.

As Dave Chapelle refers to it, these are the streets speaking for themselves. The public can't be expected to hold a single, uniform and documented solution that they are marching for. It is unfair to the point of dishonesty to try and discredit the protestors as a 'mob' because their calls for reform aren't consistent enough or well messaged enough. The presumably better educated, smarter professionals running the country(from the bottom to the top) are the one's whose job it is to find a good solution. More importantly, it's also their fault for failing to enact solutions to the problem before the public outrage hit the levels it has.

It's not really about the ramp. He's an old rickety man, naturally he has trouble.

The problem is that he forces doctors to lie about his health, then things like this make the truth obvious.

Then he compounds lies upon lies. His skin is so thin he just can't let it go, he rambles for 10 minutes about how unfair everything is.

Remember, this is a guy born to incredible wealth, never worked a day in his life, thinks that knowing a fucking rhinoceros from a drawing is an impressive achievement, is cruel and demeaning whenever he has a chance, treats the world, and women's genitalia as his own personal playground with few repercussions, no matter how egregiously he's broken the law, rips off investors, contractors, the very country he now pretends to serve, lost billions of dollars in personal wealth while bragging about how good he is with money, had to turn to Russian lenders because US and European banks wouldn't touch him anymore, yet somehow fell ass backwards into the presidency of the US. Now he uses that position to line his own pockets, without the slightest care for those he hurts or kills in the process.

And yet... he finds life doesn't treat him fairly. He whines and complains.

You know the only time he's seemed truly sad and upset while President?

Was it when 100,000 Americans died while he made things worse?

No.

Was it when police started ramming innocent protestors and media with their vehicles, tear gassing, beating, and maiming with rubber bullets?

No.

What about when mass shootings happened on his watch, or school shootings, like Obama?

No.

He got truly publicly upset for the first time in his presidency when a disappointing number of adoring fans came to a rally.

He is so pathetic and useless, so self-serving and evil that pain, death, suffering on a scale that really hasn't been seen in the US in a very long time means nothing.

The only thing that matters is him.

Now, what were you saying about Biden?

Do you still want to do that side-by-side comparison?

Do you really think this is about a ramp?

Let's not forget his executive order due this morning, drafts of which now released show him contradicting the first amendment to the constitution and directing the FBI, FTC, FCC, and DOJ to harass, punish, fine, and censor private businesses if they fact check HIS lies on their private platforms in any way....or apparently if the Whitehouse makes any complaints about them...and directed all federal agencies to not advertise on any platform the Whitehouse deems "unfair" (so soon the government will only advertise on OAN).

Where are the right wing 2a nutjobs now? They often claim the 2a exists to protect the other amendments...get to it people. If you don't go armed to the Whitehouse to protest this direct violation and decimation of the constitution, you are admitting that argument is bullshit and so is the 2a. You people went armed to state government buildings to forcefully protest public health orders because you were told they might violate your rights somehow. This time there's no "might" about it, Trump declared an executive order that is a direct, blatant, undeniable violation and attack on the constitution so clear even you can see it without Glen Beck telling you it is one.

I'm Canadian, so as much as American politics and media is pervasive up here, some of it still foreign to me.

That said, it feels like I'm observing a not undeserved observation that white-national and anti-immigrant ideologies are dominating mass shootings in the US. I guess where I get wary is with the sources most adamant about demanding that leadership on the 'right' acknowledge and address it as their own problem. Those same sources when discussing terrorism dominated by those claiming Islamic ideologies are adamant that Islam not be unfairly tarred by bad actors.

I'd have an easier time swallowing the line if either side were consistent in their approach. Either you blame BOTH Islam AND the 'right' for terrorist acts claiming common cause, or you reject BOTH Islam AND the 'right' being blamed for a few bad actors...

It might be if republicans weren't such chicken shit obstructionists that they flee their own states and threaten to murder police in order to obstruct the legislature from even voting on legislation they can't defeat by democratic means.
One party abandoned democracy and the rule of law....it wasn't the Democrats. It's a bit unfair to insist they keep playing fair and getting steamrolled when the other side doesn't. Sometimes the wrong method is the only path to the right outcome.