slackline

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

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/09/23/trump-biden-first-debate-420189 Ok, so I get that you will say it's Politico, so it's "fake news" but you guys keep letting "seadog" or whatever open his trap, so I think it should be allowed. Also, I want to restate something I've said many times, I think Biden is also despicable, just not as gross as Trump. Goes without saying that Pelosi and her ilk are also just abhorrent people. That being said, these are quotes from the Trump team. Not spun, just their words. The guy they've been trying to say has dementia is somehow an amazing debater according to them now. Just funny stuff. Not really looking to prove points here. Gotta inform yourself reading Fox and Politico right? Otherwise you can't make informed decisions... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I'm sure this is ok. You sound well adjusted. Tell cops to stop shooting people. You see how dumb it sounds when baseless allegations are thrown around without proof. Especially with the vitriol you seem to be spewing... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Possibly one of the dumbest things said here. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Good response. This discussion is what we need. Here's a problem I see with your response, maybe I read it wrong, but you can clear it up. You completely ignored what I said about the looting. That is what I'm talking about on here. Things are cherry picked in the responses to facilitate one side of the argument. By replying in the way you did, it implies the other side agrees with the point you're arguing against. Riots, not looting are an ugly, unfortunate part of a democracy. A last resort to a people that feels left with no other options. Tea Party was not looting. I don't approve of or condone attacks on federal buildings, but that is a better option than attacking the local community. If you pay attention to the leadership of the social justice movement, they don't condone looting or violence at all. They are pleading with people to keep things peaceful. You say there's a bit of virtue with the colonists. I agree. There's also some virtue when POC have pointed to problems in the system, countless datasets that back up their claims, and gotten responses like, "pull yourself up by the bootstraps whiner, and point to some example of a POC who did. That's so ignorant. That's ignoring the insurmountable odds most face. That's like saying, work hard in practice, and you'll make the NFL (very loose comparison). Yes, it's possible, but it's ignoring just how difficult it is in reality. And you're kidding yourself if you think the numbers of racists on the right and left are equal. Of course there are some in both sides, but go look at the data that exists in hate groups. Not really any on the left. Now I can see it already. Someone will cherry pick what I just said to point to and say "slackline said attacking fed bldgs is okay" completely ignoring everything else that has been said. If that makes you (not Kiloalpha specifically) feel better, well, like I said, people so firmly in their camp can't be reasoned with... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Do you believe everything that pops up in your echo chamber FB feed? Common sense man... People twist words of political figures for their narrative on both sides of the aisle. Funny thing though, you don't have to twist anything the Pres says, they're bizarre and ridiculous enough on their own... Totally who should be running the show. A guy who literally doesn't seem able to restrain himself. Words mean things, but it's cool because he knows he "could stand in the middle of Times square and shoot somebody" and he wouldn't lose a voter. You guys will excuse it as a joke or sarcasm, but the second Fox/Limbaugh/Hannity/Carlson takes something said by someone they disagree with totally out of context you guys jump on it like it's gospel truth...[emoji2361] Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Kiloalpha said: Slack, serious questions. Which party, in your opinion, best represents the looters and rioters? Response: I find it very interesting the way you chose to word this. Sincere response: neither party represents looters or rioters. I would put money on the fact that the overwhelming majority of looters and rioters aren't voters and don't care, beyond superficially, about the issues they are abusing and using as excuses to loot and or riot. Looters more so than rioters. What candidate for President do you think they will vote for? Response: See above. If they vote, probably for Biden. If you think this question is legit, then I have one for you that shows how silly this question is. What candidate/party do you think white supremacists, or the people driving their cars into peaceful protestors will be voting for? Looters or white supremacists aren't representative of the majority... Which media outlets/personalities have excused their actions? Response: caveat to my answer, I don't watch any news channels really, but this is a question you already know the answer to, and is ridiculous on the surface. What does media have to do with it? Idiots that can't think for themselves watching either side's media believe everything they see/hear on that crap. Can't work with those people. The ones we should care about are those willing to have an actual conversation and critically think about the other side's perspective. There are members on here who say they listen, but they don't. I respect a lot of what guys like FLEA have said on leadership topics, but think he's too firmly in the camp of systemic racism is fake" to actually listen to other's ideas. There has been great evidence posted right here, not just from WaPo , that he and others immediately dismiss because (speculation on my part) he isn't affected by it, or it doesn't fit his/their narrative. What media outlets/personalities have consistently excused abhorrent statements or ethically questionable things made/done by the President? and... Do you think any of the looting and rioting is justified? Response: looting absolutely not! Rioting, we're on the balance of condemning history, and I think only history will accurately judge riots for social justice. I think Boston Tea Party is similar. POC feel underrepresented and oppressed, so when they are continually ignored (as has been done similarly by people on this board who ignore the mountains of evidence that has been presented here, yet in an out of hand fashion, dismiss it without real thought) what options do they feel are left to them? They want/crave attention and change. People won't listen because they don't believe it is real. Largely because they don't feel the effects. I'm sure at the time, people ignoring the issue of taxation largely condemned the Boston Tea Party. I recognize that is a loose comparison, but you get the idea. --Please excuse typos, straggling sentences. Typing this crap on an iPhone gets tedious and easy to get lost since you can't see it all. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You keep at it guys! Trump is proud of you. Deny anything and everything that even comes close to making sense because it doesn't fit your narrative. Also, you guys keep saying Democrats are encouraging violence. This is confusing to me. What exactly are you stretching to evince this? This is coming from the party with the President quoting "looting and shooting", telling people at his rallies to beat the opposition, etc. The President! That checks... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I guess I'm just not seeing the same awesome results you guys are... He's done some good, but I'd say the balance is not in his favor. I'm not here to say anything that hasn't already been explained, then completely ignored on here. One thing Pres Trump has going for him is the inexplicable ability to inspire absolute loyalty in spite of his obvious lack of concern for anything or anyone but himself. His followers, because I don't know what else to call them, have an amazing ability to ignore everything he says and does that is clearly beneath his station while buying everything he says is "thanks to him" as gospel truth. Obama created a serious divide in our country, and Trump thought it looked like fun, so he's run with it on steroids. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's legitimate. I can respect that. I have listened to his words from this time exactly. Unless someone is acting as an apologist for him, hard to misinterpret. As to leadership, I have to disagree. I love where he has taken the country in some things with respect to other nations. Other things not so much. I'm not referring to his actions per se, but the way he does what he does. If you call that leadership, then we have starkly contrasting definitions on what a good leader is. To me, and probably most of the world, it also requires a "how to treat people, and interact with the world" aspect. He doesn't seem to care. It isn't refreshing. By the way, I seriously disliked the Obama administration, but that man has those leadership traits in spades over current CinC. Edited for autocorrect... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk