So if it's not blatantly Racist (why the capital R?), any disgusting, disrespectful, inflammatory thing someone wants to say is fine? I disagree.

Think about how the NYPD reacts to the mayor being honest by saying that he told his black son to be careful around officers and not scare cops into (over)reacting. They've acted as if he shot the officers himself, or actively supported such actions, just because he didn't stand firmly in 100% full support for all police actions.
"My group" won't be making any praise songs for killing anyone that's not a convicted (or well known) mass murderer. I won't speak for any other groups, and mine is a group of one. ;-)
The issue is more the reaction of the room full of cops over the disgusting act of one ex fed. I didn't hear one boo, and not one person left. I somehow feel the reaction would be far stronger against a song in support of Obama in that room...that might get violent.

Wait... is that the actor who played the Mayor in Spin City?

I thought she was cute and her catchphrase was suitably naff.

Although they do lose mayor points for calling one of their characters "Reaper". I think that's what I called myself at Laser Quest when I was 11 yrs old. Also he looks bullshit (starting early on that whining about Bliz balance).

So yah, Valve are kings of characterisation. I still won't knock Bliz for trying to give their characters...some character. The multicultural lineup of caricatures was a well established trope long before TF2.

All that aside, your comment wasn't simply that it lacked TF2's style and humour, you also dismissed any differences in gameplay. I am commenting on a gameplay video. My rant was more directed at this assumption that the game is the same as TF2, sans perhaps decent writing. I thought this trailer demonstrated some nifty looking mechanics that TF2 certainly doesn't have which were apparently overlooked in favour of pointing out that both games had turrets. or that it was "TF2 without style or humour".

Well, OK....if you live(d) there you DO know it better than I. I have family near by, and have driven through many times. It always seemed far more 'conservative' than you say, but again, I never lived there, I'm just going by fleeting impressions and second hand info.
What set me off was 2 part...first that you didn't bother to watch the video but still commented on it as if you had (not so bad a thing, but odd), and second the implication that anti-homeless laws were a 'LIBERAL' thing and not a 'CONSERVATIVE' thing, because the videos shown/seen have clearly shown the opposite. Apologies if I went overboard.
The one's on film saying 'feeding them is keeping them homeless' or 'we don't want homeless people here, period, and anything that removes them or makes them uncomfortable is what we want' have all been republican/tea party elderly white people. It may be they're the outliers and it really IS a 'liberal' plan, but I ask you, which 'party' does the chairman of the Miami-Dade County Homeless Trust belong to (I honestly don't know)? (I must admit I was really surprised to see the mayor is a Democrat).
So, while you seem to be at least partially correct (maybe totally), I hope you understand why I was (apparently) mistaken, since all the vocal people out there promoting starving the homeless are conservatives.
Where I live, it's a 'liberal' bastion, and we DO feed the homeless here along with other services they're offered, and we have a very vocal 'conservative' population that wants to do exactly what Ft Lauderdale did, make feeding them or offering ANY service illegal, including police and medical services. They're pretty hard core about it.

Yes, I think it was about 'starve the poor' as a method of removing them from sight, either by death or (more likely) displacement. It's not so much they want them dead, it's just they don't care if that's what it takes to remove them. That in itself SEEMS to be a 'conservative' mindset, not 'liberal'.
...but perhaps a Florida 'liberal democrat' is more right wing than a West coast 'conservative republican'?

Ahh, and we all live in a cesspool of retards and liars. Never forget! ;-)

Jesus, fucking hostile much? Thanks for posting a proper news link which this thread was lacking, but I'm not sure you read it thoroughly. "Parks shall not be used for business or social services." Nobody can sell or give away food there, to rich people or to homeless people. No hot dog stands unless they get a letter from the city.

The fact that the mayor amended his statement from "feeding the homeless just enables them" to "you can feed the homeless, but only indoors" belies his real feelings on the matter, but his excuse does have lots of precedent behind it. Cities mandate permits for all kinds of stuff, especially on public land. Not only that, but if you serve the food closer to the kitchen it stays hotter longer which reduces the risk of food poisoning. So, food safety? Technically yes. Not making the occasional exception for charity? Pretty shitty. I wonder what would happen if they asked for a permit.

And "catered food" describes how it was prepared, not how it is served. It is purchased from a business with inspected kitchens and health ratings, not from some person's back room where they leave the chicken out unrefrigerated covered in rat shit. It also usually comes in identical bins like that, whereas a randomized tupperware collection would look more like something privately prepared. It was just an observation which could indicate (or preclude) more food safety issues.

Do church kitchens have health inspections since they are not restaurants? Maybe that's the next thing the mayor can crack down on to keep the homeless hungry so they learn to get a job.

In conclusion, I hate writing follow-ups to internet comments, because now I know there's going to be another round to which I will probably not respond. Don't be offended.

Well it takes about 10 fucking seconds with google to find out the truth here. Arnold Abbott (whose name should be in the title/tags/description/somewhere imo) was cited for violating the new city ordinance against feeding the homeless in a public space. There was NO "food safety" violation whatsoever. And the last time this happened he sued Ft. Lauderdale and won. But they changed the law now to make it worse. They don't want the homeless people there. That's all there is to it. This is why you see other heartless cunt towns giving homeless people free bus tickets. They just want the homeless out. Don't feed them. Just get them the fuck out of there. To hell with solving the problem or treating them like human beings.

Here's an update (because he's done it again) with includes all the parties involved (police, the accused and the cunt mayor):

http://khon2.com/2014/11/06/90-year-old-florida-man-cited-again-for-feeding-homeless-facing-jail-time/

And it wasn't "apparently catered". Where do you get that and why would it even matter? I don't even know what it means. Any food hot on a table with some sternos is a catered event?

Honestly, they should just give all the homeless they are trying to serve a penny. Then set up their "catered" event and charge the homeless one penny to eat. Now they're not giving it away.

In the past tense, I'd agree but not today. For starters, First Nation people have 100% full Canadian citizenship and the only distinctions made based on a persons treaty status compared to a non-treaty neighbour in any Canadian city is additional rights and benefits that are potentially available to the treaty person. That is to say, First Nations people have all the full rights of everyone else in Canada, and in some situations bonuses as well.

That said, living conditions on Native Reserves in Canada are abysmal. The municipality I live in is just vastly better off than the nearby native reserves. Better access to education, policing, fire protection and health care. If that weren't bad enough, average family incomes in my municipality more than double those of neighbouring native reserve communities.

That abysmal divide in conditions though is NOT an example of we as Canadians treating First Nations terribly. If you take per capita taxes collected from community and take away per capita government dollars put back in, my community still gives more to the government than it gets back. The neighbouring reserves with far worse conditions receive far more money from the government than they pay it back. Systemically, the Canadian government is economically favouring the neighbouring reserves.

That begs the question why are conditions there so abysmal, and I can't claim to fully understand it myself. The components I DO know are at work though are many:
1.Reserves are NOT fit into government the same way as municipalities are. While my municipality is under Provincial jurisdiction, reserves are parallel with the provinces and fall directly under the federal government. The idea is reserves deserve greater autonomy to respect First Nations unique status and treaty obligations. In practice though, IMO they lose out. My community has education and health care handled by the province, which great benefits those kind of items. Reserves are responsible for those things on their own.
2. Reserves create segregation. The idea is again respecting treaty agreements and protecting First Nations culture from being overwhelmed and assimilated. In practice, that isolation is crippling the communities rather than helping them.
3. Historic abuses against previous generations of First Nations people at the hands of government get passed down to the next generation. This is amplified by the segregation on reserves.
4. Absence of accountability. The same transparency rules that apply to my municipality and all other municipalities nation wide do not apply on reserves. If my mayor spends millions of city dollars paying him or his family to do almost nothing it is more traceable than if a chief on a reserve did the same thing. Again, the idea is provide greater autonomy and not 'force' white beuracracy on First Nations, but the effect is to make it harder for them to hold their own leaders to account.

That's hardly a comprehensive list, but I think it highlights a lot of ways in which the current generation of Canadians running the country are very conscience of treating First Nations well and just failing at it through mutual mistakes. Any efforts to convert the failed reserve systems to municipality status will by fought the most by the very people living in the failed reserves. I wish knew how to move things forward to a better place, but the root is nothing as simple as 'treat First Nations better'.

If 67% of the citizens are black, then why don't they vote black representatives to the city council? No one is forcing them to vote for white people. Also, why is it that we are taught that all people are equal, except when minorities are not represented in the same percentage in every walk of life. If all people are equal, then all white cops should be good, right?

But then, if a black man is a cop, then he is no longer black, right? He's an uncle Tom. Same thing they said about Obama before he was elected...he wasn't 'down for the struggle' because he was half-white, grew up in Hawaii and went to Harvard. He was the 'magic Negro'.

Also, cops don't just act on their own. They are following orders given them by their command structure. If the city doesn't like how the cops respond, they should address the mayor and the chief of police.

Here again we hear 'unarmed black man' as a victim of a fatal shooting. When someone is trying to take a policeman's gun, he is only temporarily unarmed. A policeman's gun is community property...it belongs to anyone who can get it. 25% of cops are shot with their own weapon so cops get kinda defensive about people grabbing at it.

Also, Michael Brown was not a boy scout, he was a guy who just committed a forcible shoplifting, which in most states is considered a felony. While the officer did not know this, it may help explain the state of mind of Michael Brown when confronted by the cop.

There may be plenty of blame to go around in this situation but it doesn't help when people riot before all the facts are in. Today the cops are given all the blame while the citizen is given every excuse by the media.

Actually, she seems to be a bit off balance and wants to lean against the rope, but it gives way.

The Flava Flav bling the mayor is wearing is his "livery collar" or "chain of office". Old European affectation.

Even more suspicious: why is the mayor taking off his necklace? So he can throw it at the reporter asking the wrong questions to weight her body down?

Thanks for the information and the link to the article.

Sadly no they hold no national level positions in the legislature and i'd be very surprised if there were than a couple even at the state level. It is a relatively young party here in the US and i believe their focus is very much on the local level, such as town councils and mayors office.

The two party system you've heard about is largely the reality, though there are hundreds of parties. None hold any meaningful power on the national level, and even locally politics are dominated by the two.

So you're ok with atheist bakers not making your wedding cake for religious reasons?
Can a jewish mayor refuse you your business licenses because your "Everything Bacon!" store is against his beliefs?
Is it ok if I ask your mother to cover up her shame with a burka for religious reasons?
Can a doctor become a christian scientist and start prescribing exclusively prayer as cancer treatment for little children too? You know, for religious reasons.

You see what I did there?
Nobody gives a crap what you do to yourself in the name of your religion but don't expect us to play by your imaginary rules. You don't want to bake gay wedding cakes? Maybe the wedding cake business just isn't for you. Or maybe you should move to Iran, no gay weddings there and people are very religious as well. You might like it there.

Guys, read the video description on YouTube: "A group of protesters attempt to set fire to the mayors office. On their way to do so, they are chased by police..."

Salt Lake City has an odd dichotomy. On the one hand it's the heart of the Mormon church. And if you do go to the temple and meet one of their leaders, he will be an old white man who takes himself way too seriously.

But on the other hand it's also the most liberal and democratic leaning part of Utah. One recent example. Last Friday when the federal court judgement came which struck down Utah's same-sex marriage ban. Clerks stayed late at the County Clerk's office and ministers flocked to volunteer to marry the hundreds of gay couples who showed up immediately after the news. I know a very devoted lesbian couple who were married by the mayor of Salt Lake City that night.

Your video, Celebrities Read Crack Mayor Rob Ford's Statement, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 8 Badge!