And this did not cause hatred?
That’s not lynching, by definition.
It caused winning.
It has been referred to as a lynching by some for sure. I get where you are coming from though (it was an execution by the government technically). IIRC, the trials were a sham. The defendants weren’t given lawyers, and the trials were pushed though quickly.
Were you there? I worked less than 6 miles from where this took place at the time and the local news coverage was much different than the national coverage.
Bad cops should be held accountable more often than they are (and like I said, the Floyd case - those cops were culpable as proven by the evidence…), I don’t think anyone would disagree with that.
At this rate - none. I am in FL and if DeSantis runs my vote won’t mean shit. I liked Gabbard for awhile (as she is now an independent and can actually think) but she won’t run. Dementia Joe isn’t worth voting for, and neither is Trump (laughable as a candidate at this point).
West is a tool and a half, no real experience outside of academia and spouting off (no wonder you like him).
House and Senate races are more important anyway.
Oh, man. This reminded me to check a thread you started a few years back:
And I also found what may be your greatest response ever(it also confirms that you are zep):
1 Like
So, who are the clowns that will vote for the one that does not even acknowledge his 4 year old granddaughter…family man my ass, this family is evil
1 Like
Why do you think this is?
Why is this a bad thing? Because he hasn’t sold out to the billionaire class and/or corporations.
I have only been on here for about a year. OMG another who believes in the core of MMT. Got to be the same person because it’s impossible for two people to believe in the same thing.
And local voting matters even more.
And why is West a tool?
Yeah because over throwing other countries, killing their people and stealing their resources is cool. And most importantly is winning!
More immediate effect on local people as opposed to the need to drive a narrative.
Because academia is an insular world where everything is done in a vacuum. The worst professors I had (usually) were the ones who never worked in industry and never left academia. It’s all well and good to theorize and preach from the lecture hall podium, but many of those theories fall flat when it comes to application.
All I had to do was read transcripts of a few of his speeches. It’s quite apparent (and being a tool is endemic to politicians in general).
No. If you are going to do those things, then you better win.
West’s strength, such that it is, is commenting on culture, events, politics, etc. It is not coming up with policies or making decisions that have wide reaching effects.
He should have run for a local office and worked his way up. He has a Phd in philosophy, and he would have gotten experience reconciling his philosophical beliefs with the reality of politics. Going straight to the Oval Office is hubris.
1 Like
Okay, zep. Dude, obviously the moderators don’t care that you’re back-everyone knows who you are.
1 Like
Yep, all us lefties are the same.
1 Like
Yes, if you are going to kill people and steal their resources, you’d better win, otherwise revenge can be a bitch. Like 9/11.
So you don’t have a high opinion of national media?
And it is the politicians that make those theories into policy. Experience as a politician could not impress me less. All it typically means is the said politician has had more experience in gaming the system for those campaign donors and PAC’s.
Care to cite examples?
No. Anyone who has ever read a book on the history of media in the US should not hold them in any regard.
That’s exactly the problem. Too many politicians read/“study” or are otherwise persuaded about BS science/theories and then enact policy in response to that as if science is not malleable and every changing. They implement things based on supposed experts before theories are fully flushed out (this is generally more of a problem for “soft” scientific fields but also proves problematic in hard sciences - as proven by the idiotic global response to the pandemic).
He talks a lot here, but says nothing. He displays a poor understanding of Florida’s stand your ground law (compared to how I understand it speaking to actual attorneys here in FL). Claims taking out a major terrorist known for committing violence against American citizens was bogus…
Like any academic talking head, it’s just a lot of hot air. (I feel the same way about a lot of the rhetoric from folks like Jordan Peterson, Ben Shapiro, Al Sharpton, current comments from the Obamas, etc…). These folks could never solve problems. They acknowledge the problems while providing sweeping generalizations about solutions to said issues. Sweeping generalizations are not a plan - it’s just lip service.
It’s like when countries get together at G## summits and say “Oh, we will be Net Zero by 2050” - it means nothing because it has no framework proposed/vetted with the pledge that would allow it to be achieved.
Social scientists/politicians (basically the same thing, one typically possesses slightly more narcissism than the other) are the worst culprits when it comes to this.
1 Like