(01-13-2020 07:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

So how do you feel about hate crimes? Sounds like you might be against them being codified if you call that wrong think.

(01-14-2020 11:05 AM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  OOwl, please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are arguing that being a white supremacist doesn't mean one is racist or a bad person.

You are wrong.

Not what I am saying.

It is certainly a point against a person. It should not be the only point.

For example, Reps Omar and Tlaib have made antisemitic statements. Does that disqualify them from being considered a good person? If your answer is yes, then that is consistent with what I am arguing against. I don't like either one much, but I don't decide on that one point, but rather a totality of the person.

Another example: The gunman who shot up the Republican baseball team was a Democrat, and likely not a racist. Does that make him a good person? He passes the one question test.

I think when deciding if a person is good or bad, you need to look at the totality of the person, not just one point.

The message I am getting from the left is that everyone will be adjudged on one issue. Is that what you say, too?

If so, I am automatically a good person. Doesn't matter what else I have done or believe. I could be a three time felon or an ax murderer. BFD. Doesn't matter. I have passed the one question test.

(01-14-2020 11:37 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 07:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

So how do you feel about hate crimes? Sounds like you might be against them being codified if you call that wrong think.

I hate the crimes, and think they should be prosecuted

I think prosecuting the crime should be enough, without also prosecuting the thoughts behind it.

You assault a man, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you hate his race, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you are drunk, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because your wife left you for him, get prosecuted for assault.

By wrongthink, I mean the non PC thoughts and attitudes. Thinking wrongly should not be a crime in the USA.

So, in your opinion, being a white supremacist is just one bad mark on the totality of one's record.

Does being a white supremacist make one a racist?

(01-14-2020 12:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  So, in your opinion, being a white supremacist is just one bad mark on the totality of one's record.

A big one, to be sure. You guys are edging toward trying to act as if I think being a white supremacist is the same as leaving the toilet seat up. NO, that is NOT what I am saying.

Quote:Does being a white supremacist make one a racist?

I think so. JMO. But I have also been told that babies are racist if they are white. I don't buy that.

I think racism is the forming of attitudes toward a person or making decisions about a person based in whole or in part on that person's race.

Does that conform to your definition of racism? If not, give us yours.

(01-14-2020 12:00 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 11:37 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 07:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

So how do you feel about hate crimes? Sounds like you might be against them being codified if you call that wrong think.

I hate the crimes, and think they should be prosecuted

I think prosecuting the crime should be enough, without also prosecuting the thoughts behind it.

You assault a man, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you hate his race, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you are drunk, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because your wife left you for him, get prosecuted for assault.

By wrongthink, I mean the non PC thoughts and attitudes. Thinking wrongly should not be a crime in the USA.

So then how do you feel about workplace discrimination? Should it not be illegal to not hire someone because they’re black? I don’t see an underlying crime there, without the “wrong think” you discuss.

(01-14-2020 12:21 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:00 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 11:37 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 07:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

So how do you feel about hate crimes? Sounds like you might be against them being codified if you call that wrong think.

I hate the crimes, and think they should be prosecuted

I think prosecuting the crime should be enough, without also prosecuting the thoughts behind it.

You assault a man, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you hate his race, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because you are drunk, get prosecuted for assault. You assault a man because your wife left you for him, get prosecuted for assault.

By wrongthink, I mean the non PC thoughts and attitudes. Thinking wrongly should not be a crime in the USA.

So then how do you feel about workplace discrimination? Should it not be illegal to not hire someone because they’re black? I don’t see an underlying crime there, without the “wrong think” you discuss.

I think it should be illegal to not hire a person because of their race, whether white or black or Asian or other. I don't think the penalties should be doubled.
I think the act should be the illegal thing, not the reasons for the illegal act.

I think if being racist is a crime, it should be able to be prosecuted without the presence of another crime, like assault or workplace discrimination. It is not, currently. I am afraid this is where we are going in this country. Perhaps in a couple of decades, we will have racism Police raiding the homes and arresting people for their thoughts, without tieing those to a crime. And I think the left will be standing there applauding.

I won't be around. Sometimes being old is a blessing.

Funny, in their quest to eradicate racism, the left will end up duplicating nazism.

(01-14-2020 12:20 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  So, in your opinion, being a white supremacist is just one bad mark on the totality of one's record.

A big one, to be sure. You guys are edging toward trying to act as if I think being a white supremacist is the same as leaving the toilet seat up. NO, that is NOT what I am saying.

Quote:Does being a white supremacist make one a racist?

I think so. JMO. But I have also been told that babies are racist if they are white. I don't buy that.

I think racism is the forming of attitudes toward a person or making decisions about a person based in whole or in part on that person's race.

Does that conform to your definition of racism? If not, give us yours.

(01-14-2020 12:31 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:20 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  So, in your opinion, being a white supremacist is just one bad mark on the totality of one's record.

A big one, to be sure. You guys are edging toward trying to act as if I think being a white supremacist is the same as leaving the toilet seat up. NO, that is NOT what I am saying.

Quote:Does being a white supremacist make one a racist?

I think so. JMO. But I have also been told that babies are racist if they are white. I don't buy that.

I think racism is the forming of attitudes toward a person or making decisions about a person based in whole or in part on that person's race.

Does that conform to your definition of racism? If not, give us yours.

No sound on mine. If that is you giving your definition of racism, I cannot hear it.

Damn. Just when I thought we were having a conversation, you revert to type.

Guys, this old tired deplorable has to leave to take my disabled sister to the hospital for pre-op testing. Y'all go ahead and mount your personal attacks and I will respond when I return.

(01-14-2020 11:37 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 07:02 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

So how do you feel about hate crimes? Sounds like you might be against them being codified if you call that wrong think.

I think bashing someone's head in should be charged as...... bashing someone's head in.

(01-14-2020 10:18 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Willie Brown makes or breaks you as a democrat politician in California. He is the ultimate kingmaker. It is pretty well established that she carried on an affair with him during a time when her career advanced rapidly. You may not see the connection, but I think most people do.

And comments made in a workplace context are vastly different from those made in a public forum about a public figure.

You may think she is a fine upstanding human being. That's your right. I don't.

I don't know anything about California politics and I have never heard the name Willie Brown until you brought it up regarding Senator Harris. I really don't know much about Senator Harris at all and I never said anything about her being a fine upstanding human being. I was not ever high on her as a candidate based on her debate performances. Decency is decency, whether in the workplace or talking/writing about public figures.

Kamala, a 20-ish first year fledgling associate DA started boffing Willie, the Speaker of the House CA. At that time the most powerful politician in California.

Amazing how part-time state commission positions to the tune of 120k/yr can flow to a 1st year wet behind the ears noob associate DA who happens to to be schtuffing the California Speaker of the House.

Being more crass, and first hand from people who worked in the office and with whom I later worked, both Willie's sexual organ and Kamala were referred to by the same phrase by her compadres.

Think Speaker Brown's first name in the possessive, then Speaker Brown's last name put together.

(01-14-2020 10:46 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT AT ANY POINT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to engage in free speech. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to peaceably assemble.

Don't try and morph this discussion into "mrbig is attacking the Constitution" because at no time has that been what this discussion has been about.

Honestly, I give up on this one. Have fun defending racists. Our country is worse for it.

Have fun calling *anyone* who might ever march to keep a historical statue as a 'bad person' by default. You seem rather clueless on that big as a barn brush you keep painting with.

(01-14-2020 12:31 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:20 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 12:03 PM)Fountains of Wayne Graham Wrote:  So, in your opinion, being a white supremacist is just one bad mark on the totality of one's record.

A big one, to be sure. You guys are edging toward trying to act as if I think being a white supremacist is the same as leaving the toilet seat up. NO, that is NOT what I am saying.

Quote:Does being a white supremacist make one a racist?

I think so. JMO. But I have also been told that babies are racist if they are white. I don't buy that.

I think racism is the forming of attitudes toward a person or making decisions about a person based in whole or in part on that person's race.

Does that conform to your definition of racism? If not, give us yours.

An honest discussion by Fountains, for once. Followed by a douchebag gif. He just cant help himself I guess.

(01-14-2020 10:46 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT AT ANY POINT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to engage in free speech. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to peaceably assemble.

Don't try and morph this discussion into "mrbig is attacking the Constitution" because at no time has that been what this discussion has been about.

Honestly, I give up on this one. Have fun defending racists. Our country is worse for it.

I think the Comstitution allows racists to march without being attacked. I support the right of anybody to march for whatever cause without being attacked. I think the Cmstitution protects all of us, bad and good.

But protecting unpopular speech is something I think we both should do.

I am not OK with right wing extremists attacking left wingers marching, even if I disagree with their cause (when has this ever happened?)

(01-14-2020 10:17 AM)mrbig Wrote:  Proof of fine people counter-protesting against the white supremacists:

I don't know the people in the picture, but let's assume for a moment that one of the men is a pedophile, one of the women is cheating on her husband, another man beats his wife and a fourth, her child. A fifth is a recovering alcoholic with a DUI and another is carrying without a permit because of a 'misunderstanding' when they were younger.

Does the picture still prove that they are good people?

Especially in the context of the rest of your quote here, and the later response about not knowing the Brown/Harris story....

Owl seems to be saying the same thing. In order to know if they are fine people or not, you'd have to know much more about them than which side they marched on.

I'm quite certain that many who attended these marches or at least didn't side with those wanting to remove the statues, did so without any knowledge that the Klan organized the event.

What of this news that Trump helped enable money laundering for the Iranian Revolutionary Guard? Obviously Trump was just trying to make a buck, as always, but not a good look.

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/12163...39520.html

(01-14-2020 01:07 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-14-2020 10:46 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT AT ANY POINT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to engage in free speech. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to peaceably assemble.

Don't try and morph this discussion into "mrbig is attacking the Constitution" because at no time has that been what this discussion has been about.

Honestly, I give up on this one. Have fun defending racists. Our country is worse for it.

Have fun calling *anyone* who might ever march to keep a historical statue as a 'bad person' by default. You seem rather clueless on that big as a barn brush you keep painting with.

I”might” march against the removal of statues, although I would probably have to limit my involvement to a couple of blocks. I think history should be history.

Some people would decide I am not a fine fellow based on that. Seems very shallow to me. A lot of people think I AM a fine fellow.

I could even pass the one question test, but if assumptions are made, maybe they will just assume I would fail.

OK with me. I am not interested in the opinions of anyone that would judge me like that.

Learned a long time ago that sticks and stones, etc.

I have worked with too many felons and other flawed human beings to ever judge anybody on just one act or thought. I knew a bronze star winner, a veteran of Omaha beach, who enjoyed an ethnic joke now and then. I knew a recovering alcoholic who took loving care of his mentally disabled brother. I have known a lot of various people. I think it very unChristian to be so inflexible and judgmental. I have yet to meet a perfect person, but I have met many good people who could not pass the test set up. The worst person I ever met was a Democratic county chairman. I helped rescue an illegal immigrant family from him once. He had no prejudice in who he would take advantage of.

I guess the bottom line is this: I will judge people as I do, and y’all can judge according to your yardstick.