Recent Comments by greatgooglymoogly subscribe to this feed

Cuban goes to Walmart for the First Time

Racing for $100

greatgooglymoogly says...

The message he was trying to make is perfectly valid and worthwhile. He just did an unartful job of making it. If I was one of the guys in the back and we knew each other, I would be insulted to be referred to by my race instead of by name. "Chris, Robert, and Mike over there are faster than you all" comes off a lot more respectful than "those black guys". If he didn't know their names, "those guys in the back" would have been preferable.

And if he is making assumptions, that is exactly why I highlighted his choice of words, to point out that he was making assumptions. Pointing this out doesn't detract from his message that nobody has equal opportunity.

newtboy said:

So, because he didn't go into how well he knows them at all, you are going to jump to the conclusion that he doesn't know them and claim he just randomly assumes any black person is a champion level sprinter?
And, if true, why you don't see that as another roadblock, people making assumptions about their abilities based purely on race, confirming his point?

I disagree completely, it's a near certainty he personally knows them, likely they are part of his group putting on this event, an event designed to open people's eyes to their own racial privileges. It would be a ridiculous and self defeating gamble on his part to make those statements if he didn't know them personally....ridiculous and racist, basing his assumptions purely on race to make a point that you shouldn't do that.

You are making huge assumptions based on a lack of information to try to discount his message.....why? Why is his message so scary to you that you feel the need to discard it over your likely mistaken red herring assumption?

Racing for $100

greatgooglymoogly says...

I suppose "black dudes" could be referring to something other than race. My bad.

moonsammy said:

The video only appears to show a portion of a larger event - it seems extremely likely he'd been working with this group for longer, and had gotten to know them a bit. If you're perceiving this guy making judgments based on race, it isn't universal.

Racing for $100

greatgooglymoogly says...

If the video were presented that they were athletes and the white people were just average people off the street, the comment from the announcer would be warranted. That's not how it's presented however, it's shown as a random group of young people who we SHOULD all treat as equal.

If he had said "I've seen a couple of these guys run and I KNOW they are faster than all of you." then that would be relevant personal knowledge, not just a guess based on their race. The fact that they did run faster has no bearing on why he made the statement before anyone ran and should have no idea how fast they are.

luxintenebris said:


he may have known a couple of track athletes in the group. so the guarantee could be warranted.

Prejudice is a bias or a preconceived opinion, idea, or belief about something. When you act based on prejudice, you make up your mind about something and make generalizations about it before fully knowing about it. (from

missing the point, anyway. here's a video in a similar vein.

btw: am biased against the word 'race': as if there was more than one? even with neanderthal genetics, we should retire 'race' as a descriptive term. it's a misnomer.

Racing for $100

greatgooglymoogly says...

"If everyone was back on that line, I guarantee some of these black dudes would smoke all of you."

LOL, nothing like a little prejudice while trying to make a point about race.

AKA, "black people, the only way you could possibly lose this race is because a white guy has a head start."

Police in America - Where Are The Good Apples?

Getting up close with currently erupting Icelandic volcano

Nika uses Esper Hand. By Esper Bionics

Penguin escapes a pod of killer whales by leaping into ...

Larnell Lewis Hears "Enter Sandman" For The First Time

United B777 has ENGINE FAILURE+FIRE on departure | Cowling S

Tetris snow

Channel exposing pedophiles has been deleted permanently

greatgooglymoogly says...

The whole point of the Section 230 debate is that Youtube has no liability, just like Videosift is not liable for any of our comments. Youtube would have been sued out of existence long ago if that wasn't the case.

"No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider."

newtboy said:

The world you live in must be scary, where everything that happens is some evil conspiracy where people and companies are willing to hurt themselves in order to do evil. You actually just accused YouTube of wanting child molesters to keep molesting!?!


Just maybe, this guy has accused some innocent people of child molesting without verifiable proof, ruining their lives for likes on his channel.
If one of the people he accused without a conviction to back him up sued YouTube, or even threatened to, it would be the only smart move to remove him from the platform. That kind of accusation is worth tens of millions if unproven.
YouTube doesn’t want to be liable for someone else’s life ruining accusations.

Trump Defends Sedition Speech, Support for Impeachment Grows

greatgooglymoogly says...

Spoken like a true fascist, trying to demonize half a country simply because of their vote. You would probably love to round them up and stuff them into ovens wouldn't you?

newtboy said:

If only we COULD cancel those 72 million who supported treasonous Trump and his coup. Cancel their citizenship, their government benefits, their air travel, their bank accounts, and their freedom. They are treasonous terrorists, and deserve to be treated as such.

Incitement: Is the President Guilty of Inciting the Riot?

Send this Article to a Friend

Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients

Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon