Very eloquently put. I award you one point.

In reply to this comment by NetRunner:
>> ^LarsaruS:

>> ^blankfist:
One word: government.

HAHA! Non-statist idiots!


This seems to be more a case of statist non-idiots, not non-statist idiots.

politics

>> ^UsesProzac:

Poor fucker was in shock and scared for his life. I wouldn't be very eloquent, either!


He was loving it - he is a thrill seeker. He was fucking annoying.

Poor fucker was in shock and scared for his life. I wouldn't be very eloquent, either!

What the fuck? That's a GIRL!?!?

Well, she's very eloquent. Excellent vocabulary.

Put down the doughnuts and go get some exercise.

Horrendous video quality, damn fine message very eloquently put.

Bravo sir, I concur with your thoughts on this matter. Bravo.

No I cannot believe she is 80. She's very eloquent and well versed considering that.

Crudely put, exaggerated, and using loaded language - but I think the fundamental analysis is sound. Obama is a racist. A black racist, and he holds many racist views and opinions about white people. It's sad to say, you can't examine his words and his record without arriving at this conclusion. The man is uncomfortable around white people and holds many prejudices against them. That's racism.

Look at how he treated the whole Beergate issue. He blatantly admitted that he "didn't know the facts", but went ahead and made the assumption that the white police officer "acted stupidly". Well, thanks to a smart police officer we know that's total bullcrap. Gates was belligerent, offensive, insulting, and WAY out of line and it was all on tape. The officer did everything by the book, and was more than forbearing with the obviously racist Mr. Gates who routinely refused to cooperate with simple, common sense requests just because he was dealing with a white cop (who happened to be an expert on racial profiling).

So Obama weighs in without any facts and ASSUMED that this was all the officers fault for no reason except that in his racist brain "White cop + black citizen = white person bad". Well it all blew up in his face because when you make a STUPID RACIST ASSUMPTION based on your negative prejudices then it doesn't hold up. The facts proved that not only was Crowley right, but that Gates was a class-A jackass racist.

So what does Obama do? Does he apologize to the cops that he maligned and insulted. Nope. He has the cheek and gall to go out and say how he 'regrets that people mis-interpreted his comments". He doesn't even have the guts to admit when he's wrong because in his racist mind he thinks he's RIGHT. He's such a racist that he can't even bring himself to admit that Gates was totally 100% wrong in how he handled himself, and that Crowley was 100% right. Instead he clings to his prejudices and his biases and pretends that the cop still could have handled things better. That's RACISM.

So's crap like saying his own grandma is a 'typical white person'. So's going to Reverend Wright's little race palace for 20 years and not walking out when he rails against all the whiteys. So's writing a freaking BOOK called "A story of RACE and inheritance" in which he talks about the 'act' he puts on around white people.

Face facts folks. Glenn Beck isn't exactly very eloquent about it, and he tries to make it sound worse than it probably is, but when you get right down to it his basic accusation is correct. Obama is a racist who holds a TON of prejudices against white people. It's as plain as a Bulgarian pin-up. It doesn't mean Obama 'hates' white people. It just means that when he bumps into a white person that the little wheels in his brain paint a picture of that white guy which is colored with the palate of his biases. The result is that he 'treats' that person as if they're the "white man" caracature he's created in is brain. It doesn't mean he's going to joing the Blu Blax Blan or torch whitey homes. But when he's faced with a situation like the Gates/Crowley fiasco you better believe it makes him side with the jackasses like Gates 100% of the time for no reason except the other guy is white.

And that's sad. Pathetic and sad. I like to hope that intelligent people have more sense than that. But I have to shake my head and reluctantly conclude based on the preponderance of evidence (Obama's actions & words) that our President is a small, petty, prejudiced man.

This guy's explanations are very eloquent.

I see what you are saying, however, I'm afraid that is not necessarily the way hate crimes are viewed in the public eye today.

Also I DO know that majorities such as whites or whatever are victims of these offenses too.

Often times i'm not very eloquent with words. I found this in the wiki entry and it sums up some of my viewpoints on the matter:

In the United States, federal prosecution is possible for hate crimes committed on the basis of a person's race, color, religion, or nation origin when engaging in a federally protected activity.

that being said,

Some have argued hate crime laws bring the law into disrepute and further divide society, as groups apply to have their critics silenced. Some have argued that if it is true that all violent crimes are the result of the perpetrator's contempt for the victim, then all crimes are hate crimes. Thus, if there is no alternate rationale for prosecuting some people more harshly for the same crime based on who the victim is, then different defendants are treated unequally under the law, which violates the United States Constitution. To try to isolate motivation in cases such as rape and murder to fit into one of two categories is ridiculous. The victims in either case suffer the same result. To legislate different penalties based upon a changing definition of what constitutes hate criminalizes thought and not actions. In a free society, one's thoughts and ideas should be protected even if they offend the sensitivities of other groups. It’s when a physical crime is perpetrated, regardless of the motivation, that the same punishment should be enforced.


And just to put it out there:

hate crime
 
–noun
a crime, usually violent, motivated by prejudice or intolerance toward a member of a gender, racial, religious, or social group. Also called bias crime.

Not at all like how you defined it

and from http://public.findlaw.com/civil-rights/more-civil-rights-topics/hate-crimes-more/ ,
A civil rights violation may become a crime if it involves the use (or threat of use) of force. Hate crimes are intended to hurt and intimidate someone because of their race, ethnicity, national origin, religious, sexual orientation, or disability.

"someone" could be argued to include a group of people or community.
I am not confused. What I think is relevant, however, is how it is defined by the People and by the Judicial Systems.


I'm at a point where I'm not entirely sure what I think about it anymore. I DO know that it makes me uneasy. Benjamin Franklin once said, "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." I love liberty. I love it through and through. I think liberty in addition to love are the ONLY things worth fighting and worth dying for. I fear that these laws are giving up our liberty just to obtain a little safety.

I dunno, perhaps I'm seeing things that aren't there. Perhaps my worst fears ARE true. Just wanted to express my concern =)

I've been coding in earnest, off and on, since about 1991.

Took a Pascal class at the university on the way to an English degree that I never got. Was working for a company at the time that was building mainframe databases using NATURAL and that was my backdoor to the programming world. Worked for them for a few years. My strength at that time was pseudocode, because I was pretty good at talking to the client and figuring out what they wanted.

Did some pretty cool VBA stuff for a long while, then VB/SQL systems for about five years to the point where I can't stand to look at it any more. I destroyed my VB6 and VB.net disks kind of like a madman burning his ships.

Starting my own biz and I'm sticking to the web standards: Javascript, PHP and MySQL. Still not very eloquent where my code is concerned, but I've figured out AJAX and I can usually hook or crook my way into making something work.

I'm one of those people who thinks web-based applications will be "the thing" to come in a big way.

I'm also heretical in that when I get rich, I want to start a project that puts the browser inside of Flash.

Want to do more ActionScript stuff and Flash, animation in particular, but I can't seem to stay off this one cool video site that I know about long enough to make headway.

I can't believe how rude some people were in the audience. I don't recall other concession speeches from years past being that way.

McCain gave a very eloquent and admirable speech. Just too bad he couldn't have brought that energy to his campaign speeches. I blame the campaign managers for screwing up his chances for election. That and his VP candidate, age, and flip-flopping statements. But why worry about it? Looks like we've got ourselves a great new president come Jan. 20th!

Wonderful stuff, he's very eloquent, very learned, knows and understands all sides of the arguments, and that's what makes him fascinating to listen to. He's not of the sort who keeps having to go 'Well, I don't know much about X view' or the like, because he has looked into them all and can understand where they're coming from. It's just that they're wrong and are damaging the quality and depth of life for the rest of us.

Man, my opinion of choggie just gets lower and lower. I see a lot of people arguing over the way in which this came to pass (law wise), which I'm not going to enter, as I'm not American or pretend to know your legal system. But for choggie to state "flagrant and open homosexuality has been invariably associated the decline of great civs, hence, the reference to Belshazzar of Babylon." and to downvote this on apparently that measure... well, that's a lot of hate there.

Please demonstrate where homosexuality has brought down civilizations outside of fairy tales and fantastical retelling of real world events.

And why the F*ck does it matter if two guys or two girls get married, how does it affect you AT ALL? Geeze, let people love each other regardless of race or sex, just let people be. They aren't hurting you, they aren't hurting me, they certainly don't seem to be hurting each other, just leave them be.

[edit] and as usual, Jon Stewart says it very eloquently.

I just wish I could watch these two talk for more than 5 minutes and see were they get. With everything Hitchen's knows about the world I believe that Jon's request to have things explained to him was truely what he wants to hear. He seems to very much respect Hitchen's and considers him better informed than himself and really wants to hear what it is that Hitchen's knows that puts his position at odds with Stewart's. Even after Jon very eloquently explains his legitimate disdain for Bush and Co., Hitchen's is right there with perspective by asking if he'd support the war if only the president were more persuasive.

If you want to discuss the speech, make sure you know what was said. Transcript here. I happen to have read the speech online before I ever watched it; it is really worth reading. It's basically just a 4,881 word essay that was read by a very eloquent man. But man, what an essay.