Mr. Scorpio
Mr. Scorpio's JournalIf you don't agree with Republican delusions, that doesn't mean that you're lying.
The Benghazi hearings in a nutshell.
It's better to cross bridges than to burn them...
It's even better not to cross them, rather than burning them.
Crossing them is what they're there for and you'll always miss them when you need them the most.
It's usually best to never say never. In the end, you may find that only obstacle is yourself.
When you only look for the worst in someone, you shouldn't be surprised when you find it.
Take care.
Could there be a general consensus...
...That the world's best car mechanic or the world's smartest chess master could be a credible enough candidate for President of these United States, solely on the basis of their individual accomplishments and complete lack of government involvement?
If not, then why are a cartoonishly pandering retired brain surgeon, an egotistical real estate mogul with the vocabulary of a Dick and Jane book and a blatant example of failed modern business school philosophy regarded, in any way possible, as "legitimate" candidates?
It's like the most obvious question that no so-called credible media employee or serious politician wants to answer.
It's sheer madness.
The fucking emperor has no fucking clothes, everybody.
I can't wait until this primary season is over.
The only way that I'm keeping sane is by NOT putting any of the candidates on a pedestal. I would have no qualms voting for our candidate, whomever that shall be, in the general election. None whatsoever.
The way I see it, none of them are perfect, no matter how much I agree with them. My position is not to choose based on how much I agree with one over the other, but actually how much I would support them in spite of how much I disagree with them.
I'm an unabashed Democratic partisan. Give me your nominee and I will fight for them, hell AND high water against the GOPers.
Now let's say that the person I choose in this primary, if I ever get around to choosing one, gets elected to the White House, and once there, they'd make a decision that I don't fully agree with. It won't be that much of a shock to me because I know that presidents are usually left with only bad choices from which to make their decisions.
Also, I figure that my candidate's agenda, whomever it is, will become obstructed, both in Congress and in the street, just like President Obama. I'm definitely not of the mind that our candidate will make everything happen all on their own. One thing that's always been evident for me is that we Americans love to tear down our own heroes. No one is ever going to ride into D.C. on a white pony and give us everything that we want.
All of us need to understand that, about politics in this country, it's not about what you can get, it's about what you can take.
Lastly, this isn't about me, so there's no point in investing my identity in any of them now, picking the nominee is a collective exercise for the party alone.
The convention and the nomination can't come too soon for me.
Bernie Sanders’s biggest problem is his fan base (Angry white males)
Jake Flanagin
The first Democratic debate, which aired on Oct. 13, was a relatively civilized affair. The candidates were generally congenial, stuck to discussing policy, and even made a conscious point of avoiding personal attacks.
The ensuing commentary, however, has been decidedly less civilized. As with most televised presidential debates, deciding who “won” is always an incredibly important—if totally irrelevant—discussion that begins almost immediately after the candidates stop speaking. In this case, the media appear to be in overall agreement: Tuesday night went to former secretary of state Hillary Rodham Clinton, with senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont following closely behind.
Despite the fact that these are obviously subjective assessments, Bernie Sanders’s most vocal supporters—mainly educated, politically leftist white men—have lost their collective minds over what they see as an media-led plot to bring Bernie down.
“Tuesday night’s Democratic debate had hardly been over 24 hours before an alarming conspiracy theory began to form,” writes Amanda Marcotte for Salon; “that the media is in cahoots with the Clinton campaign to cover up the ‘fact’ that Bernie Sanders won the debate.” She cites a Change.org petition compiled by Sanders supporters (charmingly titled “CNN is CORRUPT”), that accuses “CNN, Time Warner, and ‘SuperPACs’ of somehow conspiring to cover up the truth.”
http://qz.com/525264/bernie-sanderss-biggest-problem-is-his-angry-white-male-fan-base/
Banking while black: College students handcuffed after ‘uncomfortable’ white customers complain
13 OCT 2015 AT 17:05 ET
According the Metro Police report, three individuals were approached and one fled, leading to a chase.
“The individual resisted, and was handcuffed while resisting after he refused to stop,” the report stated. “The person making the video was interfering with police, and was also detained while the incident was investigated.’
The report concludes, “Neither individual was arrested.”
In the video, two cops can be seen wrestling with 18-year-old Jason Goolsby on the ground, pulling his arms behind his back as he screams, telling him to stop resisting.
Goolsby’s companion, who was filming the incident, can be heard repeatedly telling the police, “He didn’t do nothing.”
After one officer screams at him to back up, a third officer shows up and threatens the cameraman with arrest before a scuffle breaks out and the video stops.
In a later tweet linked to the video, @darealbighomiee wrote: “We were approached because a white couple felt uncomfortable around me and my friend in the bank, this is how the police responded …”
Twitter users are planning a rally near the bank where the incident occurred, using #justiceforjason as a rallying call.
http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/banking-while-black-college-students-handcuffed-after-uncomfortable-white-customers-complain/comments/
AS black people, we NEVER have the luxury of ever being in ANY situation and not taking the time to consider how the color of our skin affects our own surroundings. We must always be aware of this and measure how much the color of our own skin may put us in danger, or affects the behaviors of white people within our vicinity, or whenever we find ourselves in mostly white spaces. For a moment, these young men relaxed from that self-awareness and found themselves targeted.
When uprisings happen, as did happen in Ferguson and Baltimore, these are explicit rejections of this kind of targeting and are events when black people reject the notion in this country that we must always behave as if we're some representing some kind of implicit threat to whites within our vicinity with our very presence alone. Because this is so, we must consciously make them feel safe at all times, or else reap the consequences. The fear of black people inside the heads of whites can create conditions where we're harassed and arrested for no reason at all, and even killed while unarmed and not posing any kind of threat whatsoever. We are the "other," and as such are not safe to be around, even when we don't care if whites are around us.
These are the conditions by which white supremacy fashions implicit threats out of black people in the minds of whites, and justifies to them the harsh and unfair treatment of black people. Why, I believe, is because must white people do understand how harsh and unfair a system of white supremacy and white privilege actually is and were the tables to be turned, they believe that retaliation against whites for being beneficiaries of this system for so long would be swift and harsh as well.
While the system exists, it must always be enforced. Even against black people who were doing nothing more than standing around, minding their own business, but doing so in the vicinity of whites who are always fearful of being victimized if the tables were turned at that very moment,
Time Once Again for the Wednesday Addams Dance Show
Profile Information
Member since: 2002Number of posts: 73,631
