slackline

You forgot that they will also say the onus is on you to prove the science... Lazy way to get out of looking anything up. For what? Is it some moral principle of debate they're adhering to? Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So I'm curious what slippery slope took you to "North Korea/Stalinist Russia". These conversations are incredibly beneficial until some falls prey to emotion and hyperbole. Plenty of guilt on both sides... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Again, let me say, this debate was ridiculous and both performed horribly, or probably failed to move the needle for anyone. Even Bernie Sanders, on Jimmy Kimmel, said it wasn’t a good night for America. I am too lazy to go back and find it, but one of the Trump fans said they liked his answers on climate change. I let it go at the time because I wanted more people to answer, but I would like to hear some reasons now for that specific callout. What about “we have to do whatever it takes to have ‘immaculate air and water” makes any sense or squares with any actions/policies coming out of this administration? That’s basically what he said, I summarized. Not only do the actions of his administration scream the exact opposite, but those words don’t lay out anything in terms of policy/future actions. So, are you just saying you’re happy with his answers because you feel climate change (something the DoD continues to list as one of the biggest threats to National Security) isn’t real, or did I miss something more specific when the two old guys were yelling at each other. Maybe Chris Wallace or Joe Biden spoke over him... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Is it #fakenews that P/FLOTUS have tested positive? Sheesh! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Tapatalk is being weird. Can't get it to post normal. I laugh so hard when people wanting to be taken seriously say fake news.

While I agree with what has been said here, that there was no clear winner, I’m not sure how you get to your conclusion about Biden. I saw a man, incredibly frustrated at the childish interruptions of a man who really pointed at zero concrete policies all throughout the debate. If I were talking with a person who wouldn’t shut up, ever, I would have been just as frustrated. Biden did stoop to his level at times, but usually when provoked. I’m no Biden apologist, I think he sucks as a politician, but he sure as heck came across as more human last night. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This is absolutely true, but I am genuinely curious what the Trump camp thinks. I don’t think Biden was particularly amazing by any means, but he sure as heck showed more restraint than Trump. He didn’t tell the Proud Boys to “stand by” (I’m actually giving Trump the benefit of the doubt that he misspoke, but it wouldn’t surprise me if that’s actually what he meant), and in general, Biden absolutely did not look like an individual with dementia. Maybe it was his performance enhancing drugs... haha. So, lousy all around, but one of these individuals is the actual, POTUS... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

No coincidence, just politicians proving how low they can stoop. No surprises on either side. More proof the tax system is busted is all. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You win. My bad. I'm not sure what you're looking for here. We'll have to agree to disagree on hilarious humor going forward. Other comments he's made don't really make it feel as if he was joking. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Go back and read every disgusting thing you've written about people you disagree with in just the last 2 days. Running to China with secrets is just one. Hyperbole is cool and all, but you show your maturity. Maturity is critically important in the air. I wouldn't let you fly on my wing. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Gotta love the anonymity the internet provides. You have made multiple statements on here regarding your career that lets me know your younger than I am, so I said kid, a moniker everyone over 10-15 years younger gets, not an insult. You made a personal attack, calling me child. Something a kid would do, backed by the anonymity of the internet. DM me your .Mil, let's talk. Not up to it? Didn't think so. Why do we resort to personal attacks on here? Everyone of you, is someone I'd put my life on the line for. This used to be a forum for real discussion. Now it's just attack after attack. We got some good stuff going, then a select few on here act superior, throw out some personal attacks, or act as if the person they don't agree with is a complete moron as opposed to someone on the other side of an OPINION. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Read the news kid... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'll throw a dog a bone here, I love that he's trying to ban tiktoc even if it's loosely based on security. Drives me batty that China is complaining. How much stuff is banned over there? They have a different internet for goodness sake! China wants it because they are stealing intellectual property left and right... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Something I just thought of w/ regards to “show your work”. If Trump could, as he says, easily explain all of this away with his taxes, why doesn’t he. Do you somehow give him a pass, but a journalist has to dime out a person who could face blowback for it is bad at his job for not proving it? Why can’t Trump put all of this to bed if he’s so confident in his proof? He just makes it worse. Just a thought. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Yeah, almost as bad as the evangelicals screaming about how he’s basically the devil, and now he’s the Savior... Or Lindsey Graham... or, you get the idea. It goes both ways. Bottom line, politicians suck, of any flavor. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Zero issues with legal tax avoidance. Huge issues with a guy who campaigned on his supposed business acumen, but has been floated along by daddy, bankruptcies and unethical business practices. Also, aren’t whistleblowers, at least the ability to do so without the threat of being sent off to Siberia a staple of a good democracy? Oversimplification, I know, but you can’t have it both ways. If someone sees something wrong, and knows the supervisors, and on up the chain will continue to hide/sweep it under the rug, they have a duty to bring it to light. I’m not saying that’s what happened here, just a general comment about your prediction of the demise of democracy because of whistleblowers... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Zero issues with legal tax avoidance. Huge issues with a guy who campaigned on his supposed business acumen, but has been floated along by daddy, bankruptcies and unethical business practices. Also, aren’t whistleblowers, at least the ability to do so without the threat of being sent off to Siberia a staple of a good democracy? Oversimplification, I know, but you can’t have it both ways. If someone sees something wrong, and knows the supervisors, and on up the chain will continue to hide/sweep it under the rug, they have a duty to bring it to light. I’m not saying that’s what happened here, just a general comment about your prediction of the demise of democracy because of whistleblowers... Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

At what point do you guys admit he sucks as a business man? How many bankruptcies? Just stirring the pot here... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Granted, I haven't read it, but NPR said $750 this morning. So if that's the case, how many bad years does a billionaire get to only pay $750? And the Republican response is just as predictable: excuse it away. I'm not a smart tax person, so that's as deep as I get until I talk with my very Republican accountant friend. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, whatever kumbaya crap that's happening in here right now, that's what needs to happen on the big stage. Honestly, I appreciate your viewpoints and it gives me a lot to consider. We don't have to come to a rock solid agreement, but understanding that the other "side" is coming from a place of genuine concern and care for the whole is critically important. We need more of it! Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well, I’ll absolutely agree with you on it being a policing philosophy problem. Cops should not be able to lord authority the way they do. Protect and serve, not dominate the situation and intimidate. Saying you felt threatened is the go-to defense. Dude put his hand in his pocket, so you shoot? I hope you never become a police officer if you’re okay with that. While I agree it’s legal, doesn’t make it right... Police need more training for sure, but not in tactics. In deescalation, working with the mentally ill, and emotional intelligence. If we’re not going to focus the training on that, then, defund (look up the difference between defund and unfund) is a good route. Some of that funding can be directed at mental health personnel that can be sent to deal with a situation instead of a cop who is ignorant (literal definition, not pejorative) on how to deal with those situations. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

That’s a good study. Thanks for posting it. I don’t think you read all of it though. Also, go back and read what KA wrote. Some of this problem is homegrown. That shows the inherent bias in the system, not racist individuals. Policing, whether by white, black or other cops, generally treats POC as more of a threat than a white person. The study even talks about this, and says one possible explanation is simply the communities local departments recruit from may have more POC, so they will be the ones overreacting to something that doesn’t require lethal use of force. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

This double posted for some reason Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I think you need to explain this better. Am I to understand that an officer has the right to the use of force for self-defense before there is any threat? So, if in a conversation and I’m a cop, I think you’re going to punch me, but you haven’t acted on that yet, I’m allowed to defend myself and tase you? Maybe I’m just not understanding your wording. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Thanks for the calmly worded and thoughtful response. I do think, your citing of Hank Newsom is slightly taken out of context. When you pull out the “sound bite” it does, indeed, appear horrible. He was making a larger point about what he perceived to be hypocrisy of a country that does, in fact, affect change pretty much any where it wants, through violent means. I think he’s taking a fairly narrow minded view on it, but consider his life experience. He’s ignorant (literal definition) to geopolitics, so his fairly undeveloped take on it could be understood. https://nypost.com/2020/06/25/blm-leader-if-change-doesnt-happen-we-will-burn-down-this-system/ I’ve posted a link to an article that includes the full text of what he said. I had to go find it, had not read it before. It took literally long enough to type it into Google and start reading results. Here’s another from USAToday https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2020/08/13/fact-check-democrats-have-condemned-violence-linked-protests/3317862001/ It quotes a bunch of people with D next to their names as condemning violence and looting. https://acleddata.com/2020/09/03/demonstrations-political-violence-in-america-new-data-for-summer-2020/ 93% of BLM protests have been peaceful. Trump admin and allies have labeled them all as violent anarchists. That doesn’t check. https://kutv.com/news/local/utah-black-lives-matter-leaders-condemn-violence-and-vandalism-at-protests Another instance of BLM leadership condemning violence. There’s more. Left leaning and right leaning media all have reported on the same stories. Does this fit the narrative people are putting out about violence? Nope, so let’s ignore it. The Asian American comparison you make isn’t quite apples to apples. https://journalnow.com/news/state/white-supremacists-took-over-a-city-now-nc-is-doing-more-to-remember-the-deadly/article_a9d267b6-4b8c-5710-8548-c6c40af495a4.html If you haven’t heard of this, I encourage you to read up on it. Tell me, at what point have Asian Americans ever faced this level of oppression? I’m not saying they’ve had an easy road to hoe in the US, but it doesn’t compare to hundreds of years of oppression. I’m not calling you racist, or anyone here for that matter. I am saying that the system has biases. Ignoring that hurts us all, makes it difficult to as you say, chase these dreams together. I agree with that sentiment 100%! I’m just saying if we calmly have this kind of discussion, it becomes more difficult to deny that. Rejecting the idea out of hand doesn’t mean someone is racist, but it COULD (did caps cause I don’t know how to do italics) mean someone is afraid to admit they’re wrong, or pride is preventing them from seeing that. You could easily make the same argument for 1st gen African Americans. I think you hit the nail on the head here. From birth almost, they’re told they can’t do it. Often self-inflicted, but virtually always, based in their experiences. Almost every black person I know has had a scary encounter with police. Being pulled over for them and us is a totally different experience. Take a second on Google and you can find a bunch of examples of violent, aggressive white people not getting shot or tased while interacting with a cop. I myself have been stupidly belligerent with cops that have been power tripping, and never felt threatened. Not excusing my actions, but it is something that even 5 years ago I would have considered a non-issue. Now, I genuinely (from my perspective) see it as a result of biases in cops. Even proven to exist in black cops. They’re prone to consider a black person as a threat before given an actual reason for it. Remember, yes, more white people are stopped by police, but they make up ~70% of population vs. ~13 % of black people. The ratios of police violence/use of force when you take those numbers into account are pretty one-sided. Then if you break it down even more, white people are in most cases 2x more likely to be carrying a weapon, drugs, or actually guilty of a crime when being stopped by police. None of this excuses violent criminals’ actions, but to me, it sure makes it difficult to calmly accept the level of “threat” black people are treated with by police. Read these studies or don’t, your call: https://harvardcrcl.org/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2009/06/HLC104_crop.pdf https://scholarship.sha.cornell.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1882&context=articles https://www.nap.edu/read/24928/chapter/9 I am not sure where the North vs South argument with regards to racism came from. I didn’t make it, nor am I advocating that there are none in the North. I’m not naive, of course there are. Anyone who has read any history knows that the North doesn’t have a clear conscience when it comes to racism simply because they banned slavery sooner. Anecdotally, my experience has shown a much harsher version of racism in the south than it has in the north. Scary at times even. That’s simply my experience though, so meh... Here’s where I probably lose more diehard conservatives. I’m not talking forced readings of White Fragility, THAT’S STUPID. I’m saying it’s not enough to simply not be racist anymore. We need to actively be anti-racist. Here’s my definition of that (haven’t looked it up): internally examining ourselves for biases that may shade our judgments, calling out injustices where we see/hear it (something I think most military people are good at), and looking at the system with an objective, not subjective eye to see if there are changes that need to be made. Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk