• Content

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Feedback


Posts posted by Andy9o8

  1. Anvilbrother

    Well it's been two hours, where is the proof of your claims?

    You need to push away & get some fresh air

    I've seen this syndrome before. Pretty soon you'll have bunny eyes and be flinging your poop.

  2. masterrig

    I heard on the radio, yesterday, that the U.S. Military is considering changing the names of various military bases named for Southern Generals, leaders such as Fort Hood, Texas. What's next... changing the names of counties named for Southern Leaders? I think, the whole thing is getting silly. I say, let's forget about it and move forward. Leave it in the dust of history and just work on our individual selves to be better people. Chuck

    I'm still waiting for the dedication of Fort Benedict Arnold. Let me know when that happens.

  3. Quote

    I suppose the next phase will be to remove any resemblance to the Stars and Bars from all history books and museums anywhere the flag or representations of the flag may appear. Pretend it never happened?

    Nobody here has remotely suggested that. With all due respect, sir, demonizing a position by spinning it is not effective persuasion.

  4. billvon

    >You defend the indefensible.

    He's not defending the flag. He is saying that there are many people who do not feel it symbolizes what you feel it does.

    The original US Constitution supports slavery. That does not mean that everyone who supports the US Constitution supports slavery.

    The Whydah Gally was a famous slave ship that sank off the coast of Cape Cod. It was discovered in 1984 and thousands of people dive on the wreck. A guy in our parking lot has a "Whydah Gally" sticker on his car. It's a fair bet that he does not support slavery.

    Cotton from the South was shipped all over the world. That does not mean that anyone who used cotton before 1860 supported slavery.

    The people who pulled off the 9/11 attacks were Muslims. That does not mean that everyone who supports the rights of Muslims supports terrorism.

    Don't make the mistake that everyone who supports anything has the same feelings about it that you do. The 16 year old girl who wears a Confederate flag bikini didn't buy it because she wants to advertise her hatred of blacks. The General Lee in the Dukes of Hazzard did not have a Confederate flag because the show supported slavery. You may think it represents slavery, but most people who used it within our lifetimes did not.

    The problem with that approach, and those analogies, Bill, is that they fail to appreciate that although, as you say, the Confederate flag, as you say, no longer literally symbolizes "slavery", and has evolved, in the late 20th and 21st Centuries, into a generic regional-pride symbol for many people, there are those white people who have always concurrently used it as an overt symbol and expression of racial animus (even if not literally "slavery"), or at the very least, a preference for racial segregation. It was, for example, most certainly used as a "battle flag" by the most strident opponents, mainly in the Deep South, of the civil rights movements in the 1950s and 60s - as is within the memories of many millions of people (including myself) who were alive at the time.

    To this day, even though it's used by some with innocent intent, it is used by many (even if not all) of those Americans who are bigoted against black people to express that bigotry. And thus, it has come to be viewed not just by American black people, but also many millions of Americans who are not black, as a symbol of ongoing racism and oppression that should be consigned, if not entirely to the ash heap, at least to a museum.

    Sometimes it takes time for collective conscience to catch up with that; that's why the Confederate flag on the Dukes of Hazzard may be viewed differently today than it was in 1979. To some, the General Lee is a souped-up orange car on a TV show. To many others, though, General Lee was a traitor who betrayed the uniform he donned at West Point, and should have been hanged for treason; and had he prevailed, millions of black people in America would have continued to be enslaved, possibly for generations.

    In the 1960s Charlie Brown and his friends used to wear white sheets as Halloween costumes. Of course I don't think for a moment that Charles Schulz was giving a veiled nod to the KKK. Still, I'll hazard a guess that their pal Franklin's parents and grandparents weren't particularly comfortable with those kids dressing up that way. Similarly, even though the swastika is a symbol that pre-dated the Nazis by thousands of years in various non-European cultures, it's generally considered pretty un-cool to display it now, even if, say, just by a person to honor his great-uncle who died as an ignorant 17 year old kid because he was drafted into the Wehrmacht during WWII.

    So yes, to this day, the Confederate flag occupies.. not an exclusive place, but certainly a concurrent place, as a symbol of ongoing racial animus and oppression in the United States, and no amount of wishing, hoping, spinning or dissimulation will make it otherwise. That's the reality today, and it is ignored or given rhetorical cover at the peril of enabling it.

  5. Quote

    Juries can be unpredictable as well, we'll see.

    Jury selection is always crucial. It can be a huge wild card. This case, once it's finally over some day, will almost certainly reinforce that principle.

    One illustrative example just off the top of my head: the jury in the first OJ Simpson criminal case, resulting in his acquittal, was quite different from the jury in the first civil lawsuit against Simpson (arising out of the same facts and basically the same evidence), which ended in a huge monetarily punitive civil verdict against Simpson. That was not mere happenstance.

    And yes, juries can also be very unpredictable.

  6. I don't understand why skydivers read and respond to her facebook and twitter accounts. Don't they have anything better to read? Trolls crave attention, and feel nourished and validated when they receive it. Watchfulness by the sport's community to be prepared for further tactics, yes. But the more open attention she receives, the more she gains. You post shit in her sites, she deletes them and feels powerful. That's how the koo-koos of the world operate. Who do you think reads her sites? Normal people in the community? The news media? Hell, no. Just her pals and a few a pitiful, wanking followers-on. That merits our active engagement? Really?
    Too much like high school for me. Been there, done that. Check, please?

  7. billvon

    >They knew full well from whom they were accepting it in the first place.

    Of course. Both parties really like money, and are not too picky about where it comes from. Go through any politician's contributions and you will find a fraction coming from murderers, convicted rapists, questionable organizations etc.

    BASE jumpers?

  8. cvfd1399

    Do they "vet" their drivers in any background check kind of way? I downloaded the app and it said many times uber only facilitates the connection by the app and is not responsible for the actual ride.

    They can say it all they want, but I look forward to seeing how a couple test cases pan out.

  9. SethInMI

    He will claim the video doesn't prove he was driving. If the lady in the passenger seat when ryoder pulled up was his wife, she cannot be made to testify against him (is my understanding). If the video doesn't give clear evidence he is behind the wheel it will get thrown out.

    You may be right. I hope not. But even so, I do hope this costs him time, money, and aggravation. Maybe he might experience an epiphany.

    Why would it get thrown out? The video is a corroboration of ryoder's own testimony. If ryoder can attest to the fact that the man was driving, I would think that his testimony combined with the video would be compelling.

    Oh, Yoder can testify to that. And he will. :|
    If Yoder testifies that way, and it's not rebutted by a denial, then that's strong evidence that the man was the driver. If the man chooses to testify, then it will be Yoder's word against the man's. Of course, if the man denies he was driving, then by process of elimination that implicates the woman as the driver, and we charge the woman and prosecute her. If the woman testifies the man wasn't driving, then logically she'd be implicating herself as the driver.


    At 0:15, looking at/through the windshield of the car reflected in Yoder's left rear view mirror, I think a reasonable argument can be made that the shape of the silhouette of the figure on the passenger's side of the car seems to be the same shape as the wife's hairstyle as is visible at about 1:25 - 1:32.

  10. Driver1

    ***What is interesting is all the white people posting in this thread but where are the condemnations? Why aren't you white people condemning this shooting by one of your own?
    It keeps on happening as well, white men shooting people in America, its time for all you white people to tackle these extremists and nut jobs in your community, don't pretend you don't know who they are its YOUR communities! >:(

    Trust me, I want that pathetic little shit to fry for what he did. The death penalty fits such a crime.

    Happy now? :P

    I suspect the undercurrent of Skyrad's post - and he can correct me if I'm wrong - is that every time there's a crime committed by a Muslim, all the redneck droolers in the US holler, "Where's the Muslim outrage??" - you know, as if Jamile and his family, being Muslim, are moral reprobates for not holding a condemnatory press conference every time there's a terrorist act somewhere. Same goes for every time a black man commits a heinous crime against a white person: " Where's the outrage from black leaders? Sharpton!! Jesse Jackson!!"

    And, so, I suspect, it's a bit of ironic "Right back atcha."

    My challenge to all the racist mother-fuckers who post racist mother-fucking shit on these boards regularly: Hey, guys, this guy makes even you look bad. Well, worse. Where's the outrage?

  11. Various people to me: Why don't you accept PMs?

    This is why. 2 or 3 times getting that shit, and I just shut it down.

    p.s. - I believe the "rule" that you don't publicly re-post PMs has exceptions. In my book, if someone uses a forum's PMs to threaten or personally harass, all bets are off, and they can be outed. PMs ain't momma's apron to hide behind.

  12. Driver1



    So why didn't the government that is there to protect her, not train her properly?

    Why didn't she take responsibility for her own situation? I would start with not fucking psychopaths with murderous tendencies.

    I thought you were all about personal responsibility?

    She made the wrong decision in her personal life.

    Dude, you can't always tell which guy is a psychopath right off the bat. Some hide it well. Some don't show their tendencies until much later. It's a crapshoot sometimes.

    But those aren't the goalposts here. In this case, it was her ex-boyfriend, against whom she'd taken out a restraining order, presumably because she was very well aware he was a psychopath.