President Trump- The Implications

[Red Arrow]

It would be be equally dumb for Californians to vote for a horrible candidate because he had a "D" but the great candidate has an "R" ...

But it wouldn't surprise me.

[rebound]

Don't play into that mumbo jumbo. People are people, and about the time everybody understand that skin color really is not a determining factor in ANYTHING, is about the time we will all get over this crap that is going on in society now a days. It's racist in my mind of you to assume that is racist. You are saying it is racist because in your mind it plays on the assumption that blacks are "dim witted" or whatever you want to call it. But you are the one with the racist thought in your mind. Get it. You just need to forget about all the stuff you have been brain washed with and realize that everyone just wants to be treated the same. That means, they want to be able to tell  the same jokes, and poke fun at each other with fear of some person being offended about race and color that really has nothing to do with anything anymore. Do you realize I am like 2% black. You all probably are even more. I have a ton of everything in me. We all do. We have passed beyond the point where we are all different. We are all the same.

Rant over!

I want to be clear, I wasn't calling you a racist.  I was (and am) suggesting that the meme you used was not the best one to make your point because, as we have seen by others' comments, it can definitely be taken that way.  (I mean, seriously, I shouldn't have to explain the symbology and innuendo going on in the picture.) Context does matter, and if you are arguing a point, don't give the opposition easy angles of attack.

I also want to agree with this sentence:

"People are people, and about the time everybody understand that skin color really is not a determining factor in ANYTHING, is about the time we will all get over this crap that is going on in society now a days."

However, it is impossibly naive to think that racism has not been a major issue throughout the history of the US, and is not still a factor in our daily lives.  Color is, unfortunately, still a major factor in how people live their lives in this country.  It will be great when it isn't, and we should all work towards that goal, but let's be realistic as to where we are right now.

[erfalf]

However, it is impossibly naive to think that racism has not been a major issue throughout the history of the US, and is not still a factor in our daily lives.  Color is, unfortunately, still a major factor in how people live their lives in this country.  It will be great when it isn't, and we should all work towards that goal, but let's be realistic as to where we are right now.

It's an unfortunate condition plaguing society today, but not one that we have to live with forever. Maybe this is naive of me to think this, but I just have faith in the goodness of human nature that we will one day move beyond this. I see it in my kids more than ever. They don't get that race and skin color are a thing. Or that Sapna has a strange name, that's just her name. Or that Enrique speaks with an accent. They just don't look through that blurry lens that my generation, and even more so the previous generations did. That is what leads to my "naivete". One day when my kids are of age, they will be looking at our generations saying what in the hell were you doing, just like we are doing to the previous generations now.

[cannon_fodder]

I disagree.  Racism has always and probably will always be a thing, in some form.  The ancient Greeks had preconceived notions of various peoples and so do we.  I have every expectation that my kids will too.

Preconceived notions aren't necessarily the problem.  Sapna is probably of Indian or SE Asian descent.  Enriques accent likely means he speaks Spanish or was raised by or around people who do/did.  Someone named Mohammed is very likely Muslim.   Someone who was raised in China almost certainly has very different life experiences than I do.  All of that is a preconceived notion that gives us clues about who those people are - it could be wrong.  But with that knowledge we can extrapolate more details, which get progressively less likely to be accurate, but can still be useful in many ways (such as helping us pick up on social clues or understand context).

Having that knowledge isn't a problem.  Relying on it as a fact is a problem.  Using it to treat everyone one thinks it might apply to as a single unit is a problem. Using it to treat people differently, for perceived good or for bad, is a problem. But the preconceived notions in and of themselves are just part of life experiences and human bias - the trick is knowing they exist and being able to, or at least trying to set them aside.

[heironymouspasparagus]

It's an unfortunate condition plaguing society today, but not one that we have to live with forever. Maybe this is naive of me to think this, but I just have faith in the goodness of human nature that we will one day move beyond this. I see it in my kids more than ever. They don't get that race and skin color are a thing. Or that Sapna has a strange name, that's just her name. Or that Enrique speaks with an accent. They just don't look through that blurry lens that my generation, and even more so the previous generations did. That is what leads to my "naivete". One day when my kids are of age, they will be looking at our generations saying what in the hell were you doing, just like we are doing to the previous generations now.

Very naive - we won't move past it as long as people like Trump, Moore, and Sessions (and others) are celebrated and held up as examples.  Their 3 past histories alone should make them poster boys about how NOT to behave and think.   Oh, wait...to thinking people, they are just that!

[heironymouspasparagus]

The Pedophile Brigade, lead by some guy named Bill Mitchell is now claiming that 40,000 black "invaders" crossed into Alabama from other states to vote against Roy Moore!   And guess what - I bet most of the 600,000 Moore voters will believe it!!

[heironymouspasparagus]

Imagine....



Imagine if your phone company could not only limit who you could call, but could also censor any conversation they didn't like.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the types of appliances you could own and the company you could buy them from. Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the number of light bulbs you could have or your thermostat setting.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you bought a car from Ford and the car would ONLY run on certain Ford approved roads and ONLY let you drive to certain Ford approved destinations. If you wanted to go somewhere else, you'd either have to buy a different car, or pay Ford a fee for each non-Ford road and destination.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Image if your Internet access worked like an HMO. And you had to get permission to use certain non-approved devices or apps or pay extra to access websites outside of your "network."

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you lived in China, or Cuba, or Iran, or North Korea, and your internet access was limited to officially approved sites.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

[erfalf]

Imagine....



Imagine if your phone company could not only limit who you could call, but could also censor any conversation they didn't like.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the types of appliances you could own and the company you could buy them from. Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the number of light bulbs you could have or your thermostat setting.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you bought a car from Ford and the car would ONLY run on certain Ford approved roads and ONLY let you drive to certain Ford approved destinations. If you wanted to go somewhere else, you'd either have to buy a different car, or pay Ford a fee for each non-Ford road and destination.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Image if your Internet access worked like an HMO. And you had to get permission to use certain non-approved devices or apps or pay extra to access websites outside of your "network."

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you lived in China, or Cuba, or Iran, or North Korea, and your internet access was limited to officially approved sites.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

You mean remember what it was like in 2013.

[heironymouspasparagus]

You mean remember what it was like in 2013.

Yeah...end of 2016.

[swake]

Imagine....



Imagine if your phone company could not only limit who you could call, but could also censor any conversation they didn't like.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the types of appliances you could own and the company you could buy them from. Imagine if your electric utility could dictate the number of light bulbs you could have or your thermostat setting.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you bought a car from Ford and the car would ONLY run on certain Ford approved roads and ONLY let you drive to certain Ford approved destinations. If you wanted to go somewhere else, you'd either have to buy a different car, or pay Ford a fee for each non-Ford road and destination.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Image if your Internet access worked like an HMO. And you had to get permission to use certain non-approved devices or apps or pay extra to access websites outside of your "network."

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS.

Imagine if you lived in China, or Cuba, or Iran, or North Korea, and your internet access was limited to officially approved sites.

THAT'S WHAT REPUBLICANS JUST DID TO YOUR INTERNET ACCESS

I think this is a bit much and I agree with the FCC that the main benefit of this law is it will allow ISPs to innovate more.



As in this decision will allow ISPs to innovate more on ways to part customers from their money to the benefit of the ISPs profit margin.

[erfalf]

I think this is a bit much and I agree with the FCC that the main benefit of this law is it will allow ISPs to innovate more.



As in this decision will allow ISPs to innovate more on ways to part customers from their money to the benefit of the ISPs profit margin.

I think it's apt to recall that one of the first things the FCC did in the name of Net Neutrality was go after T-Mobile for offering unlimited data plan. Just saying.

[erfalf]

The hyperventilating is comical.

What we have is a communication channel that is incredibly popular and shows no signs of letting up. You think that service providers who have to fight for customer loyalty are just going to start implementing some of these draconian measures that you "suggest" might happen? No, they'll be out of business in a week.

Look what happened a few years ago. Cable companies saw an opening, made the product available, and now you have all the big AT&T types trying to keep up. All to the BENEFIT of the customer. Now even Google has entered the fray in some markets.

These hypotheticals are just nonsense really. The reality was that FCC was going to do far more to limit customer satisfaction than the combination of all these private companies.

And with the improvements in speed of wireless tech, this only limits what the big bad AT&T types will do. They MUST retain customers.

The sky is falling net neutrality chicken little types should really just go back to saying the world is going to end because of global cooling, warming, well, change...whatever.

[patric]

All we have seen so far is lying to the FBI.  And Comey conviction.  There is a process going on here that is amazingly opaque so far.  Mueller is building on small brick at a time.  Will take time, but he is no where near done.  And it seems he has some very strong backers in the system somewhere - maybe Congress, maybe elsewhere....hard to say.

Intimidatingly threatening to "restucture" the agency that is investigating his circus seems like a separate count of obstruction of justice in and of itself.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/trump-calls-conduct-at-fbi-disgraceful-before-appearing-at-quantico/2017/12/15/4f4a4fae-e1a7-11e7-bbd0-9dfb2e37492a_story.html

[rebound]

I think it's apt to recall that one of the first things the FCC did in the name of Net Neutrality was go after T-Mobile for offering unlimited data plan. Just saying.

Not sure where you are going here.  The FCC went after T-Mobile for not disclosing the throttling that was part of their "unlimited" plan.  It had nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

[Hoss]

Not sure where you are going here.  The FCC went after T-Mobile for not disclosing the throttling that was part of their "unlimited" plan.  It had nothing to do with Net Neutrality.

Correct.  They would do it with or without NN.  But let the Fox talking points reign for those who watch it.