>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.
>> ^draak13:
I'm really quite impressed with people who really hate cops soooo much; anything of or being field law enforcement seems to immediately evoke feelings of loathing in some people, to the point where a police officer cannot be without fault. Myself and many people who admittedly lean a little anti-cop end up siding with the cop on this one, but there are so many anti-cop people who are so far polarized against police that they still can't see any cop doing right...even when the officer deserves commendation for sticking to their training so well.
I dare anyone to post a police confrontation video in which they feel the cop was completely justified. Try posting a video where the police officer was not covering any sort of gray area of correctness in handling the situation, but in which every action was completely justified and necessary. Try posting a video where we feel empathy and satisfaction for the cop. I bet you'll be amazed at how many people will still hate the officer for what they did.



>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.
>> ^draak13:
I'm really quite impressed with people who really hate cops soooo much; anything of or being field law enforcement seems to immediately evoke feelings of loathing in some people, to the point where a police officer cannot be without fault. Myself and many people who admittedly lean a little anti-cop end up siding with the cop on this one, but there are so many anti-cop people who are so far polarized against police that they still can't see any cop doing right...even when the officer deserves commendation for sticking to their training so well.
I dare anyone to post a police confrontation video in which they feel the cop was completely justified. Try posting a video where the police officer was not covering any sort of gray area of correctness in handling the situation, but in which every action was completely justified and necessary. Try posting a video where we feel empathy and satisfaction for the cop. I bet you'll be amazed at how many people will still hate the officer for what they did.



How are cops supposed to deal with people who endanger others by driving at ridiculous speeds? Please tell.

And if those people resist when they're pulled over, what's a cop to do?

@peggedbea: If by "sick" you mean that "stomach is falling" or "nauseous" feeling, then yes. If you meant the "I'm sick of eating these leftovers for the 5th day in a row" sick, then no. You are absolutely right in that red+blue strobes = FML, though.

Haha! Thanks; you made my day =). I think that's what I needed to see. I finally get it now.

Cheers!

>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.

Maybe you missed the earlier comment where @Hive13 was pulled over for a crooked plate. Maybe all the cop wanted to do was fix the plate for the guy before he lost it and would have to incur a replacement fee. Maybe he was pulling him over as a simple personal courtesy to say that, much as I would tell someone at a stop light. The difference is that the cop has the benefit of the lights to get they guy's attention.>> ^peggedbea:

meh, yeah... sometimes we're called anti-authoritarians... it's not cop-hate on a personal level... it's cop-hate as an ideological platform. google that shit.
was the dude a dumbshit for getting out of his car? you bet.
do i still dislike police and find this traffic stop/ the societal punishment paradigm we exist in abhorrent? you bet.
do i hate the culture that constructs these kinds of scenarios? absolutely.
>> ^draak13:
I'm really quite impressed with people who really hate cops soooo much; anything of or being field law enforcement seems to immediately evoke feelings of loathing in some people, to the point where a police officer cannot be without fault. Myself and many people who admittedly lean a little anti-cop end up siding with the cop on this one, but there are so many anti-cop people who are so far polarized against police that they still can't see any cop doing right...even when the officer deserves commendation for sticking to their training so well.
I dare anyone to post a police confrontation video in which they feel the cop was completely justified. Try posting a video where the police officer was not covering any sort of gray area of correctness in handling the situation, but in which every action was completely justified and necessary. Try posting a video where we feel empathy and satisfaction for the cop. I bet you'll be amazed at how many people will still hate the officer for what they did.

Bacon grease, tequila and lime? Awww, thanks for calling me "honey"!

Jews can eat bacon if they sleep on an orthodox couch.


>> ^peggedbea:

the jew who lives on my couch made a salad dressing tonight from bacon grease, honey, tequila and lime.
A SALAD DRESSING MADE FROM BACON.

>> ^peggedbea:

"on knees for jesus" .... seriously?


I think his name is intended as a joke (IOW he isnt really a Jesus-freak, he's pretending to be one)

^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
**FOX NEWS ALERT**
>> ^peggedbea:

i accidentally caught .. my doctors .. watching shep smith .. "crotch", .. seeing .. weiner .. plastered all over the screen .. amazing! .. my crotch .. had to resign.

>> ^chilaxe:

@ gwiz665 @ Jinx @ MaxWilder @ quantumushroom @ Yogi @ peggedbea
It seems like a mistake to imply we don't care if people are douchebags or if they irrationally destroy their family.


It is irrational in the extreme to expect politicians to be saints. In general, they're kinda the opposite. We know that, and accept it. So why do we act all shocked when one of them screws up?

What chaps my hide is that we don't get all outraged and demand resignations when they blatantly go against the will of the people and their sworn oath to uphold the Constitution when passing legislation like The unPatriot Act.

@gwiz665 @Jinx @MaxWilder @quantumushroom @Yogi @peggedbea

It seems like a mistake to imply we don't care if people are douchebags or if they irrationally destroy their family.

I have had tons of respect for Weiner, minus a few of his childish antics. But now...

1. How can sending someone a groin shot over the web be guaranteed as consensual? What if it turned out that what he thought was a 21 year old was actually a 13 year old girl pretending to be 21? If he was comfortable enough about his anonymity how could he know who he was dealing with?

2. Really? You are giving a man who has railed against dishonesty in politics and the media a pass on a knee jerk lie? Remember the true measure of a person is not in times of comfort but in times of stress. He almost might have been able to save himself if his first reaction was the truth.

3. Everything that a political figure does, professionally or personally, has something to do with their politics.

4. So do I.

5. Agreed, but this is not about his marital issues. His marital issues are as a result of his actions, they are not necessarily the cause of them.

6. Agreed. This alone invalidates him in his position and makes him hardly supportable now.

7. See numbers 3 and 6.

8. For me the issue is not the original screw up but instead it is the lie that immediately followed that is the problem. If his default reaction is to lie like a 5 year old to protect himself what does that say about him? Did he lie out of panic or did he actually for a moment think that he could fool everyone and get away with it? It is hard to trust a person who tells the truth only when there is no other option.

How can his antics be taken seriously now? He will be yoked with this for the rest of his political career.

>> ^peggedbea:

1. i don't give a shit what he does in his private life, as long as it is consensual.
2. i can totally see accidentally sending something embarrassing to the wrong place and then freaking out about it and making up some lie to cover it up, i'm pretty sure i've done it.
3. this has nothing to do with his politics
4. i like his politics
5. his marital issues are not my business
6. disappointing that he put himself in a position to be discredited for every valid thing he says from now on
7. stupid that political opponents and news outlets will tell america that who he jerks off with somehow discredits his work
8. i really really really don't care who beats off/screws whom as long as it is consensual. i wish the news would regain some class and keep peoples private lives private... even though he technically outed himself... still can we just do what my friends would do if i accidentally posted a dirty picture to my facebook and deleted it immediately and politely pretend it never ever happened???

You will find my avatar in this video
http://videosift.com/video/The-Dentist-Of-Jaipur

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
oooh to be so beautiful and so delicious!

btw, wtf is your avatar?
In reply to this comment by eric3579:
Look how pretty. http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story/2011/06/02/pei-blue-lobster-584.html

oooh to be so beautiful and so delicious!

btw, wtf is your avatar?
In reply to this comment by eric3579:
Look how pretty. http://www.cbc.ca/news/offbeat/story/2011/06/02/pei-blue-lobster-584.html

yes, you are right. i just think "it gets better" itself isn't necessarily accurate -- but everything else is great.
>> ^peggedbea:

mmm i don't know, i'm not usually a fan of PSA's or PR campaigns in general, but i do really like this one. maybe it's just because i love everything dan savage does.
but i also think the point is not only to let lgbt kids know that high school sucks and then you move on and A LOT of people in the big big world actually do support you, but also to let other kids know that homophobia isn't cool and in that context i think this campaign has the potential to be effective.
i saw dan savage speak live recently and he talked a bit about the 'it gets better' project and the letters he gets from gay kids all over the place. one story made me cry, this 15 year old girl watches 'it gets better' videos on youtube under her covers, on her phone, after everyone in the house is asleep so she doesn't have to feel alone. she can watch literally thousands of videos from people telling her there is nothing wrong with her, the world outside of her tiny little high school kid box supports her and after she turns 18 she can leave and be whoever she wants, i think that is a measure of success. >> ^berticus:
Ok. I know I'm a cynical fucker, but.. I'm getting sick of hearing this message, because frankly, it just isn't always true. But I guess it's not quite as powerful to say "for some people it gets better but for other people things will still be shit!"
Plus what rottenseed and MaxWilder said.
Having said that, I still think it's a good message. I don't know if it will actually have any measurable positive impact (e.g. reduction in suicides) but I hope so.

you can't assign evolution feelings, opinions, emotions. you can't personify it like that. to do so is at best- a misstatement, and at worst - an intentionally manipulative scare tactic. every successful adaptation is a mutation. mutations happen constantly. some are more attractive than others. but someones "less attractive" mutated genes don't deem them useless. i'm short, have bad teeth and i run slow. i still bred. but evolution has 0 opinions on the matter because it does not have a personality. i am valuable only because of my ability to mean something to someone and find meaning in someone else. "survival of the fittest" does not describe which adaptations are "better" and therefore not "useless", it was a term coined by a social darwinist to justify gross poverty and legitimize human suffering.

anyone that has the ability to love and be loved is intrinsically valuable. if love and morality have an evolutionary basis, which they do, then i see no need for god. your attempt to demonize evolution with callous and offensive personifications is weak. and gives a bit of insight into your own morality and how you view people. evolution didn't deem kids with syndromes or other disabilities as worthless, you did. god didn't generously bestow upon them the ability to "behave nobly", they're human beings .. they did that on their own. this self righteous, pompous ass interpretation of the "miracle" of admirable behavior being displayed by someone you obviously view as "less than" can fuck right off. >> ^shinyblurry:

Is this called argument from offense? Do you have a point here? In any case, whether you like or not, that's what they are according to evolution..genetic abberations. ie, useless people.
>> ^peggedbea:
you don't know what i do for a living, so i'll skip the part where i yell at you passionately kids with downs/people with disabilities/kids with syndromes.
furthermore, survival of the fittest was not a phrase coined by darwin. and did not originally apply to the evolution of organisms. applying it to people with genetic disorders further offends me. >> ^shinyblurry:
Surely, you can invent value, which has meaning to yourself..but there is no intrinsic value to anything created by mere chance. It is only the arbitrary value that we assign that makes something meaningful. I valued people when I didn't believe in God, loved them very dearly, yet there wasn't a logical reason to do so.
Consider, what is the value of someone born with a severe disability, like downs syndrome. They are a burden to society and they themselves cannot enjoy life as a normal human being. They are pretty much genetic baggage as far as evolution is concerned, a disturbing abberation to be eliminated. In the survival of the fittest, they should be culled from the gene pool. Yet, even they are capable of noble behavior, something your science cannot explain. Can evolution explain this one: http://teachingsofjon.com/ ?
>> ^peggedbea:
again, statements like this make me feel like the world must look terrifying.
your intrinsic value to me is not dependent on whether or not a creator meant for you to exist.
>> ^shinyblurry:
If the Universe was created by chance, life has no intrinsic value or meaning. You can believe it does, but then you could get hit by a bus. It truly doesn't matter what you believe, because you are at the mercy of a random fate. Not that you could even trust your own mind, being that you are just a biological machine whose thoughts are just chemical reactions.
No matter how noble human beings become, a meteor doesn't know anything about that..humankind could come close to utopia, but wandering black holes are not impressed. Nothing that anyone accomplishes will have any lasting impact on a Univese that will fall into heat death and fade away. To say life is absurd and futile under these circumstances is a kindness.

yes, they would be. lots of other people would too. people with weaker immune systems, people with psoriasis, people with bad teeth and lazy eyes and bone spurs. i'm short and i run slow. but we are a civilized society and do not need to write anyone off as human refuse. and how self righteous of someone to think that their specific path from creation to enlightenment is the only thing keeping "less desirables" from becoming total human refuse. that some large male diety in the sky is the only thing blessing the freaks with the ability to behave "nobly" and that without HIM these "burdens on society" would just need to be left in a landfill somewhere.

oh and also, every successful adaption started off as a MUTATION. not that i think fragile X or angelman's syndromes are the future of the human race or anything. i just resent absolutism and self righteousness. and every statement he makes at me stinks of both.

i totally understand that he doesnt mean to come off like a complete dick and doubt that he is actually a complete dick, but every interaction i have with him.... he comes off as a complete dick.
In reply to this comment by JiggaJonson:
Although I largely disagree with shinyblurry, I will concede that if we were not a civilized society, people with either physical or mental disabilities would be at a much greater risk of death. MOST new genetic mutations are deleterious, that is to say, they cause harm to their respective owners. And while I fully understand that Darwin didn't coin the phrase, it doesn't change the idea that some people are vexed by their genes in one way or another.

However, I DO agree that writing said people off as "genetic baggage," as he put it, is callus and unkind. We could just as easily say that "love" is simply a chemical reaction in the brain, and can be written off as such. But it's the value we place on those feelings, the choices we make to assign it meaning, much like the choices we make to care for one another, that give our own lives meaning and purpose.

In reply to this comment by peggedbea:
you don't know what i do for a living, so i'll skip the part where i yell at you passionately kids with downs/people with disabilities/kids with syndromes.
furthermore, survival of the fittest was not a phrase coined by darwin. and did not originally apply to the evolution of organisms. applying it to people with genetic disorders further offends me.