• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  

mikewof

Members
  • Content count

    31,384
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About mikewof

  • Rank
    mikewof

Recent Profile Visitors

17,593 profile views
  1. Germany fell to the Nazis, not because of the people you describe, but because regular Germans allowed it to happen. The most politically progressive country in the world, a beacon for civil rights, gender equality and justice, and within years they had been reduced to a fascist cartoon. The most dangerous people in Germany weren't the tiny group of Nazis, they were the regular Germans who didn't recognize the danger of what was happening in the courts, in the banks, corporate boardrooms and municipal buildings. And then by the time they did recognize, it was too late, some of them went along with the insanity because they were filled with hate, and others because they were filled with fear. It's that kind of mob mentality that's far more terrifying than the "people filled with hate." In the case of Charleston, a psychopath killed someone and tried to kill many others. But that didn't resemble Nazi Germany. The bystanders helped, the police arrested. In a previous riot, one Black woman even used her own body as a shield to protect a racist from getting beaten to death. That kind of response doesn't worry me, Len, because law and order prevailed. It seems to worry you very much. But look at two cases where law and order did not prevail ... 1. Police in Baltimore who secretly belonged to the KKK, and a justice system in Missouri that created default judgements for tens of thousands of Black people for trivial crimes, and then systematically kept justice from a specific segment of that population. 2. After the Charlotte riots, self-proclaimed anti-racists identified and "outed" racists on the internet, with tens of thousands of followers threatening these accused, having them fear for their lives. In some cases, the racists were genuine, but they were being prosecuted by a lynch mob for exercising their Free Speech. In at least one case, the lynch mob identified the wrong "racists" of someone who wasn't even in Charlotte, and the poor guy received death threats and feared for his life. Now honestly Len, which set of events more closely resembles Nazi Germany, the riots in Charlotte, or the Missouri defaults and the internet lynch mob?
  2. Huh? Nazis are essentially zero threat. Whatever few remaining Nazis there are, can probably be found in an old age home, with the biggest danger being that their poor skills as marksmen in WWII might translate to an equally poor aim to shit in the bedpan. Neo-Nazis might arguably be a threat, but they are not Nazis, they hold essentially no positions of power in the world, their iconography and customs are even outlawed many places in Europe, and even many European Nationalists find them a little creepy. Neo-Nazis are not Nazis, they're more typically social outcasts, even among fellow Neo-Nazis. Yeah, one managed to run his car over some innocent people, and one managed to kill Alan Berg just a few blocks from my childhood home back in 1984. But really, how much of a threat are these Neo-Nazis if they can't even commit the random crime of hatred without getting immediately caught? It takes a violent amount of self-denial to look at what the Drug War and the Every Child Left Behind Act has done to Black children and decide that Neo-Nazis are actually the bigger threat. I guess you could claim that the whole collection of White Supremacists are a real threat, bundle the Christian Identity people in there, and the grab-bag of identified racists in police departments and prisons around the country. Yeah, there might be something to that ... but what power would they have on their own? They're dangerous in the police departments and the prisons and justice system because the industry has been built around a bunch of billionaires who do things functionally identical to those racists, but they alleviate their guilt by throwing some quarters at various Black nonprofits. I kind of get your emotion with this ... you find danger with what the White Supremacists represent. But intentions are not actions, if they were then the biggest threat in the world would be any psychopath in the military who thinks that a nuclear war is winnable. The reality is that White Supremacists and neo-Nazis do not have power, they are paper tigers. When you call them a "threat", you give power to them that they don't have. They're of limited intelligence, poor schooling and emotionally ill. They don't need fear, they need education and they need help. And unlike a lot of sniffy liberals who claim to be inclusive and non-racist, these Supremacists have often lived a chunk of their lives around these people whom they hate. I know what a Supremacist really thinks. But a progressive liberal who just got mugged by a Black guy? I don't know what that person thinks, you won't get a straight answer out of that person anyway. I hear what they think sometimes, when they think that nobody is listening. And those people are terrifying.
  3. I'm more concerned about institutional racism like those banks, those prisons, and those lawmakers than I am about a relative handful of poorly-educated racists. Just the fact that the racists exist in such a debilitated state supports how far we have all come from the days when they actually ran things. But institutional racism is corrosive, it burns through generations of families and people, it destroys futures in a way that the KKK or neo-Nazis could only dream. When you walk around poor neighborhoods in the North or South, visit schools that struggle to stay happy places, struggle to give these children a tiny oasis of hope, it doesn't take long to realize that this is happening today, not because of "domestic terrorists" like you describe, but because of predatory finance and predatory tax law, and predatory industrialization, Congressional pork that bypasses poor people but plops toxic waste on top of them. They are the predators, and these people without hope are their prey, fuel for their revenue machines. So you want me to call you "crazy" for being more concerned about some poorly-educated racists rather than the institutional machines that churn poor people's lives into profit? Okay, you're crazy. If that racist whom you find so offensive stares at the face of a child, he might feel hatred, he might feel nothing, he might change, he might not, but he rarely actually does anything to destroy that child's future. But when a lawmaker or corporate tycoon looks at that same face, over the last fifty-some years, he sees the face of someone whom he can and will exploit, a life that he can and will destroy in the interest of revenue. You tell me which is a bigger threat.
  4. Absolutely. Interview the flaming racist, give the public someone to hate. Clock out and order of of those Mojitos and some jalapeno poppers for me, I'll be down to the bar in fifteen minutes. Or we can interview the suits who donate $15,000 to the NAACP as they pull $150,000,000 per year out of their prison industries contract that legally enslaves Black men for selling roughly the same pharmaceuticals as that millionaire down the street.
  5. That had very little in common with the Nazi, Germany that this guy identifies. It was a demonstration of, by, and for people who have essentially zero political power and and feel disenfranchised by equality. If we're genuinely worried about the kind of institutionalized hatred that was embodied by the Nazis, we would right now discuss banks that hire industrial psychologists who adjust due dates on credit cards to maximize late fee and overdraft revenues. Or maybe police departments that drag in as many poor people as they can find to trigger eventual court orders and default judgments. Mass incarceration of Black males for nonviolent crimes, urban and poor public schools that have been gutted by the Every Child Left Behind Act. Families broken apart by corporate taxation that discourages development in broken neighborhoods. We could talk about that all day, or we could talk about some racist who may well have a learning disability and need some public assistance.
  6. Yeah. Interview a flaming racist, suprise, suprise.
  7. Jelly beans? Did you get them to use as a side for milksteak? Boiled over hard?
  8. She was hoping for it, most likely. Talk like that makes a boring interview interview into a marketable interview.
  9. From guys like that? A few of them run off the rails with a psychotic break, but most of them are milquetoast. They use 3D printers to make their Nazi memorabilia stuff for their "uniforms" and they go to Nazi specialist tattoo artists since the regular ones won't do swastikas. They take cross country trips with their "friends" to shop at small town surplus and antique shops to find Nazi WWII bring-back memorabilia. Basically, if you sub out the Nazi stuff for cottage living or Pomeranian breeding, you're left with some really adorable gay couples. Nazis had control of a country and a war machine. These guys barely have control of their own lives.
  10. I had the exact same words in my head before I opened the thread, right down to the quotes around the we.
  11. A friend's dad in Washington State bought one of those $10 raffle tickets for his son's high school, won the little 3 cylinder Geo Metro. He's looking at that little car, like, WTF am I supposed to do with that thing? In an inspiration, he took out the back seat and accepted a rural mail delivery route from the US Postal Service. Over the next ten-some years, he ran that little thing into the ground as a morning job before the family logging business. 35-some MPG, with mileage and gas reimbursement from the job, and well over 300k miles on the clock. Made enough on the mail route to send the kids to college, two weddings and pay off the house.
  12. So you think that the fix is in for McM. How exactly would that work? Mayweather's purse on a win, including sponsorships, would be worth something like $225 million, and about half of that on a loss. So to get him to dive, someone would need to come up with about $150 million minimum to fix the fight, more like $250 million, because the vast majority of that purse goes to promotion, training and support. But okay, say someone connected has that kind of tax-free money laying around, to get their money back, at existing odds, they would need to bet another $150-some million on the fight, but that that much cash would then move the line, the betting industry is only so big, so by the time they looked at just breaking even, they would be in it for close to 3/4 billion dollars, since they would have to take their tax-free money and pay tax on it through most of the betting lines, because even overseas lines need an exit point somewhere. I don't see that happening. If McM manges to beat Mayweather in a very suspicious way, then I'll consider your theory.
  13. You think the match is going to be fixed? I'll play along ... of which fighter would it be fixed in favor? Do I understand you correctly that you think the match is going to be fixed in favor of McM to force a rematch? You think that Mayweather is going to dive? 49 wins, and he's going to blow Marciano's record-setting 50 against a guy who isn't even a boxer? Are you high? A better question ... assuming he wins, why should an exhibition match against a non-boxer count as his 50th match?
  14. Aren't those pronghorns gorgeous? That coloring looks more like some exotic animal in Africa than anything indigenous to the Western high plains.
  15. When boxing was young it was fairly indistinguishable from MMA, basically desperate slightly deranged killers doing their thing. Then the rules were gradually codified over the years so that skill and preparation could beat insanity. Boxing as a youth betterment is mostly post WWII, I did youth boxing, even back then a lot of the rules and equipment were still being tweaked. Our instructors had fought without headgear, with different gloves and with longer rounds. But kids are doing MMA in youth leagues pretty safely, those rules will evolve too. But at its core, as a combat sport, boxing is weaker than Thai, the best boxer from my youth league could have been taken down by a decent kid fifteen pounds lighter and a sweep to the knees. The stance In boxing presents a miserable lower defense, it's designed for mobility, and the rules prevent a strike there anyway. In the combat sense, boxing is antiquated, kind of a classic Savate, it looks awesome, but unless you're willing to modernize it, restrict the rules, or only fight other Savates, then it's going into the fight a little weaker. One boxer combined his boxing with a three position Wing Chun stance, he had to keep switching handedness, but it was more mobile than a regular shuffle stance. I wonder if boxing will gradually update with things little that?