CosmicBills

Aww! I would love to work on Season 3. I thought the thing with Hal was kind of a cheat. It's like they realized they missed an opportunity with having the eye thing turn Tom evil so they used it on Hal instead. But -- that said -- it could make for a fun 3rd season if they go all the way with it. Dug the final 2 minutes of the show (won't spoil it), but clearly the new guys could be quite awesome. Looked very much like a comic book super-hero. A familiar one in fact: http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/M/MV5BMTY1NzU4MzY2Ml5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwNzM5NzEyMQ@@._V1._SY317_CR9,0,214,317_.jpg Or am I stretching?

Yeah. Inoperable brain cancer can be a B word.

Honest question, not trying to stirr up the sh*t. I'm one of the ones who scoffs at the notion of a liberal media -- not because the network anchors and producers don't lean left (they do) but because the concept of a "mainstream media" no longer exists. Whenever I hear a friend or family member vent about the mainstream media it isntantly paints them (to me) as either being out of touch or just looking for something to rail against. What is the definition of the mainstream media? Is it just network news? Or does it encompass all print and cable news mediums as well? Does mainstream media also include movies and television shows that appear on network TV? What is the precise definition to you?

Your point is fair. By sewer politics I meant the entirty of our current political discourse, not just the Tea Party. The Democrats are just as bad, ditto with the GOP. The advancement of social media, the seemingly diminished attention span of the general public, and the proliferation of vitriolic cable news have all lowered the bar in terms of what constitutes a "rational" discussion of the issues. You can't offer a counter point to someone's opinion/view/platform without being labeled as whatever the buzzword of the month is for that side (racist, liberal, conservative, socialist, 1%, 99% etc). I read OC's post lauding the Tea Party as being a party of change -- but I just see more of the same from their party and their canditates. Of course, this is my view from the outside. I'm always open to new information.

So... the Tea Party is inclusive but if you oppose their political views you are the one being divisive? How does that solve the cycle of political divisiveness that you're saying the Tea Party is above? How does that foster honest dicussion from countering viewpoints? Doesn't it instead just insulate your party from the outside world limit the opportunity to strengthen or even enhance the party's platform? Not to mention forces the other side to write the party off as being as exclusionary as they paint the Democrats to be? Look. I hear what you're saying and on paper it all sounds great. But it's not reality. The Tea Party -- no matter how noble their intentions might be, I'm not trying to pass judgement on their platform -- have been fighting tooth and nail in every election. They've played just as dirty as the other side because that's politics today. The public's ever shortening attention span demand a shock to the system to get them to pay attention which in turn has spiraled us all down the rabbit hole. So far the Tea Party have done nothing to help guide their constituents out of the sewer where our political discourse currenty resides. Instead it's just the same sh*t wrapped in a different box. Your post here points that out in high definition.

That's so racist.

Good luck with that.

Totally agree. Overcorrection is a real concern and more often than not promotes more hate rather than solving the situation. To me, it's why the notion of "hate crimes" is so dangerous. You can't legislate what's in a person's head -- even in the interest of protecting the minority. The example you cite here is the perfect reason why it's so dangerous. The thing that fascinates me from a distance is that people one on one are reasonable. By and large I have found that most people are not only able to overcome their preconcieved biases but want to overcome them. Hell, maybe even Dave in Elmira if you asked him off this board. Yet, if you put that same person in a group and turn up the noise and name a scapegoat, suddenly the individuals in that group fall into lockstep against the percieved threat. I've done it myself. Our natural impulse as a species is to view differnt as threatening.

jjamie's link shows there is in fact empirical evidence and I'm sure you've seen the opposite occur a bunch of times. I have too. But that's due to an over correction to a problem we like to pretend no longer exists. Of course I'm speaking subjectively. As I said a couple times now, I'm not trying to make a political point with any of this. It's a subject that interests me from an entirely different level. I don't claim to have solutions but am always interested in hearing ideas.

It's based on careful and close observation which I realize is completely subjective. People naturally judge and form preconceptions in their head based on appearance. We're genetically designed to seek comfort in homogeneous groups. Thousands of years ago the smarter folks learned how to manipulate this to their benefit. Kingdoms were formed and rulers were crowned based soley on the principle that it's far easier to control a divided populace than it is a united one. As long as there has been rulers of men we have been conditioned to believe that different equals dangerous. It's been beaten into our heads since the beginning of time and is reflected in our society today. We've moved from fearing natives to fearing blacks to fearing brown folks. From fearing monarchies to fearing fascism to fearing communism to fearing conservatives and liberals. Hell, even right now in this thread you have people reacting to things I'm not even saying because it hints of being different from their political platform. It's ingrained in us because it makes us easier to control. But that's just an excuse. And easy to write off as paranoid. The truth is each one of us makes our own choices. We choose whether or not we react to an impulse, conditioned or not. I'd like to believe that the vast majority of humans look past the differences and interact with the person. And I've seen it first hand. I've seen strangers helping strangers with incredible compassion and empathy. But I'm under no delusions that it's universal. I've seen too much of the other side to believe that. So if it's not universal, then it means the playing field has never really been level. Someone will always have the upper hand -- and someone will always be out there trying to tell you who's to blame for it. How someone chooses to deal with that reality is up to them. Some cry victim and sit on the sidelines. Others push through and make their mark through effort and perserverance. Crying victim isn't a solution -- but neither is pretending the issue doesn't exist. Overreaction can be dangerous but denial guarantees a perpetuation of the cycle. Oh for sure.

Of course it's lame. It also happens to be true.

As a white male you're given the benefit of the doubt. As a black female you're given the burden of extra scrutiny.

(taking notes)

Are you implying there aren't any societal benefits of being a member of the majority? EDIT: Again, not talking politics. Talking real-life.

I missed this yesterday somehow. Happy belated to you, Cable!!!

Happy Happy!!

So... a dude comes up to you at the mall and slams you. And your response is: "Let me get your number" Got it.

We're still talking about two different things -- which is undoubtedly my fault. What you're saying about illegals is a political policy argument I am not trying to counter, support, or even discuss. I recognize what you're saying, I know it's an issue (a serious one) -- it's also something I have very different views on than probably most people on this board. But I also know that my own views on immigration policies are not actionable, thus I don't even bother getting into it. What I'm saying, (and why I picked on your original quote about being a white, male Christain and thus being at the end of the dole line) is that the system has always been unfair. There will always be inequality of opportunity in this country (and world) because human beings by nature are judgemental. We live in a society that favors white, Christain males because our society was established by persecuted white, Christain males. This isn't a political statement. It's just how things are. And, as such, your daughter by nature of the way she looks, was born with a leg up financially on every other person of color in this country -- legal or illegal. Again, this isn't your fault or the GOP's. I'm not trying to pin this on any political party. This is just the reality we live in. No one gets to pick the uterus they're born from. It's blind luck. So if the system we're born into is inherently rigged in your favor, I don't see the virtue in complaining that another group is getting help evening the odds. It in no way threatens you or your daughter's access to opportunities. Instead, those sorts of complaints -- to me -- come off as ridiculous. It makes you look weak. It makes you look like the guy who wins the lottery then complains about the taxes. Does helping minorities level the playing field limit oportunities for other people? Absolutely. But those people, people like your daughter, have more oportunities to begin with. Is it fair? Nope. But then again, life has never been fair and never will be.

Again, I don't understand why you need to write down my number. I'm wearing a jersey, standing right in front of you. I know there are 20 other people running around on the field with numbers on their chests, but clearly you're able to remember one set of numbers -- especially when you want to crush the person wearing them, right?

:lol:

This I already knew.

I'm not talking about immigration policies in any of my posts. I'm not attempting to blame anyone for the fact the world isn't fair, I'm not even attempting to argue a political agenda. There's inequality of opportunity everywhere you look in this world. Always has been, always will be. But people who claim that they're white, male and Christain and are somehow a victim? THAT'S hilarious to me. As it should be to anyone who has actually lived in the world. This isn't a political statement. This is a sociological observation.

I did not know that. Noted.