Jump to content

Hephaestus

Member
  • Content Count

    668
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Hephaestus

  1. As an aside to this conversation, if you want to talk about reckless endangerment, you should look at this link...... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_alleged_Natural_Born_Killers_copycat_crimes In law, they have the 'but for test' and the 'foreseeability test.' Sarah Palin is a monster, there is no doubt about that now. Are you familiar with Westbrook Pegler? The avowed facist that called for the assassination of FDR among others? Palin quoted him during the 2008 Republican national convention. Make know mistake: she know what she was doing when she used the phrase 'Blood Libel.' While I am open to considering the causality of Palin's crosshairs map, with Oliver Stone, it's case closed..... The movie Natural Born Killers CAUSED the murders of several people.
  2. I question these assertions. From what we know about Jarrod Loughner, he was not a Leftist, rather, a young kid who was being influenced by philosophies all over the political map including white supremacists and Ayn Rand. I also question the assertion that his motives were solely due to some kind of personal obsession. Even if he had a personal obsession with her, the notion that his activity had NOTHING to do with politics is likely to be erroneous. Perhaps there will be more to come on his mental state. He was clearly out of his mind. The statement 'he didn't murder her because she was a democrat, or because of her policies' is being kicked around a lot right now. But what they have said is he read a lot of anti-government rhetoric. I haven't heard any kind of 'Jodie Foster/David Hinkley' or 'Catcher in the Rye/Mark David Chapman' explanation yet.
  3. Hephaestus

    Sad news

    You lose to one of his teams, and you remember it, brother.
  4. I would much rather be called a Warrior than a geek. I think that a store like Best Buy having 'the Geek Squad' is a million times worse than Marquette calling themselves 'the Warriors.' Here we are, in the United States of America, where nothing is more sacred than our First Amendment Freedoms. The freedom of speech, the freedom of the press. But oh yeah, you can't say anything racist, sexist, or homophobic. But what you can do is fuck with geeks. You can have a major electronics store that has a huge sign that says 'Geek Squad' in every location. I think you are missing my point. I am not saying that Asians are geeks, although there are some that are nerdy. I am saying that there are a lot of times that Asians fuck with geeks. Case in point: the Rutgers student. I agree with the posters on this site that originally argued that the punishment was too harsh in this case. These kids were young, and it's not something that happened with the same kind of malicious intent that has happened in other cases. It's not like the cyber bullying case here in Missouri, which only let to misdemeanor convictions. http://www.columbiamissourian.com/stories/2008/11/26/missouri-mom-convicted-lesser-charges-online-hoax/
  5. No, but this is some random internet site, not some public policy forum. If you don't know what I mean, I tell you straight up: I personally think that it's weird that it's total anathema to say anything racist, sexist, or homophobic, and yet the technical support section of Best Buy is called 'the Geek Squad.' We sit back and debate whether or not it's ok to use the term 'Fighting Illini' or 'Marquette Warriors' out of respect for Native American Indian populations, and yet these names don't really have an implicit derogatory connotation. I don't think we should use those names for school mascots, and I don't think there should be a 'Geek Squad' either. Yes, it's true that when you use the term 'Geek' you aren't referencing someone's cultural heritage, or their race. But you are still hurling a derogatory slur towards someone regarding aspects of their personality, mannerisms, etc., that they probably can't change, and often times are not only about who they are, but who their families are as well. I have a couple of friends of mine that are Asian. They love to use the term 'Geek.' I often notice that when I walk into a Best Buy, there always seem to be a lot of Asians working the Geek Squad counter, and they don't look like Geeks to me. It kinda bugs me, and it should.
  6. I don't disagree with what you are saying at all. I don't think that punishing the hell out of Ravi and Wei is the answer. In fact, I don't think that the answer lies in politics or law. The answer lies in families knowing the psychological realities of intimacy, and having the foresight to pass this knowledge onto their children, gay or straight. Parents need to be able to talk to their kids about how gut wrenching intimate relationships can be, and how they need to do what they can to protect their own privacy and their own psychological well being from people that choose to go around sniping at other people's personal affairs. I know that when I finally reached my late 20s and my 30s, I was able to do a lot of reflecting on the ways I treated people disrespectfully, and the ways that people were disrespectful to me - primarily in the sphere of intimate relationships. My take on it has a lot more to do with understanding the mistakes that I made rather than simply saying to myself 'well, that's life, and it's never going to change.' By the way, if I see an 18 year old thwarting someone about their intimate relationships, it means a lot less to me than when I see a 30, 40, or 50 year old doing it. There is so much more to this story than just a gay/straight thing. There are definitely racial components at work here too. Tyler was a nerdy white male with glasses. I don't know about you, but something about this story bugs me for the same reason walking into a Best Buy bugs me. Any idea what I might be talking about?
  7. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/30/eveningnews/main6916119.shtml I found this story very unsettling. It goes to show how devastating it can be to someone if their privacy is invaded, particularly when humiliation is involved regarding intimate relationships. Any thoughts on the ethical implications of this kind of invasion of privacy? Any thoughts on the legal penalties that are likely to be imposed?
  8. I don't have the book - can you name a few of these core concepts?
  9. If someone asked me 'what do Deleuze & Guatarri stand for?' I wouldn't be able to say a single thing. I like the 'greatest hits' idea. I realize that this is not a technique that Deleuze & Guatarri themselves use, but I think it is a good way to start to try to explain certain philosophical arguments. I recall taking a graduate level Communications Course at Northwestern, and the prof I had (who was the NU debate coach at one time) suggested I use the same technique in explaining some Habermas in a paper. I think that it is a good idea to use the 'greatest hits' method to explain something in a 1AC. Are there any Deleuze and Guatarri scholars out there that would be able to provide me with a 'greatest hits' album of some of their most important ideas? [i don't mean a bibliography either.]
  10. You brought up Zepplin. Zepp is something that I have a handle on while D&G is not. I read the book Capitalism and Schizophrenia one time (a couple years ago). I read some excepts of it to a buddy I studied philosophy with many years ago. 'Impenetrable' was the only word he could think of. What are some of the 'greatest hits' with regards to why this aff corresponds to D&G's way of thinking? What are some of the key components of your aff that reflect the style and or content of what D&G profess?
  11. Everybody hates Kobe. He is one of the most hated superstar basketball players ever. He has 5 rings and only 1 MVP. The basketball world and the public just don't want to give this guy any credit. Most overrated player? Steve Nash. Damn right. When they got Shaq last year, I just laughed. The more I think about it, the more right LeBron seems. Dan Gilbert is a shithead.
  12. I think Kobe is the most underrated superstar in the game. Even after 5 rings, two without Shaq, people still bitch about him and his game. I don't judge people for getting testy now and again. Now, I will say that this media circus thing that surrounded LeBron smacked of sadism. It came off to most people as a premeditated slap in the face, and he knew what this would mean to the Cavs. Look at this article though - this guy Michael Rosenberg - what a baby! Coming from a 48 year old man that is on the Forbes 400 list of Americas Wealthiest Americans. http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2010/writers/michael_rosenberg/07/09/gilbert.letter/index.html?eref=sihp&xid=shareFB
  13. Yeah, I don't know what to say about it, and Sev, you are right - he is sounding like a jilted lover. LeBron, like the guy who got his high school honey pregnant, is probably being asked to be respectful about a hundred bazillion times. Hey be respectful to Cleveland. Hey be respectful to Cleveland. Hey be respectful to Cleveland. After you hear it a million times, you are probably like 'fuck Cleveland.' The funny thing is, is that the press conference that he called was probably motivated by his intention to be respectful, not be disrespectful. I do maintain that LeBron was dogging it in that last game, though.
  14. Sev - I saw very little internal passing with the Cavs. I did not see the sense of urgency that would seem to be appropriate with a season on the line with his last game with the Cavs against the Celtics. I did sense that he was blaming his teammates in prior years. But he's only 25. Right now, he is how old MJ was in 1988, a year after the Bulls got Pippen, and two years before the Bulls won their first championship. How things are with LeBron are now are similar to how things were with Jordan back then. I think that LeBron has some reflection to do, but I think that I (and the media) would be wrong to make hostile conclusions about his character at such an early age.
  15. I am a Bulls fan, and I don't want LeBron. I think he is a prima dona that has no conception of team play or cohesion. He is a high level cherry picker. I saw how he shifted into low gear when he knew the Cavs were going to lose to the Celtics, thinking ahead to where he was going to go this year. I think he's going to Miami, and it's his best chance to win a title. What he needed from the beginning was a guaranteed scorer other than himself on the team. Mo Williams and Antwaan Jamison couldn't cut it. Prediction: He goes with Miami, which is what he should do, but they get dumped in the conference semi finals or conference finals by Orlando or Boston.
  16. Hephaestus

    Jim Joyce

    I feel bad for that ump. That call wasn't that obvious. It's obvious now after seeing in on high def instant reply. I hope Selig overturns it and we see a new era in baseball officiating. It's time. I know that I have blown a few debate rounds as a debater and a judge. I don't lose a whole lot of sleep over it. I am glad that for once, people are treating the issue with respect and maturity.
  17. Hephaestus

    Jim Joyce

    Weird. What's with all the perfect games this year? Is it symptomatic of steroid withdrawal?
  18. I have been listening to this discussion, and it seems that the people involved seem to be thinking in terms of an 'if/then' necessary-sufficient form of reasoning that isn't necessarily applicable. If you really wanted an answer on the nature of all religious leaders in general and their moral proclivities or lack thereof, you would just need a really big bean counter. Since we don't have that, we are just left with our own personal hunches and biases.
  19. The thing I find pretty unsettling about Kagan is the absence of any judicial opinions we have to base a decision on. She is 50 years old. She could be on the Supreme Court for 40 years, and we have absolutely no idea how her decisions are going to come down. Obama says 'she is a moderate.' How do we know?
  20. I have read Dawkin's the Selfish Gene, which is widely considered the most important text describing the new field of evolutionary psychology. It describers motivations by humans and other species through a 'gene's eye lens.' Actions and decisions are measured not at the individual level, but how it might affect a species' genetic replication, etc. I am not a religious person, but I don't think scientists provide a lot of ethical guidance. We don't ask physicists about problems in biology or industrial engineering, so why are we asking biologists about ethics? It's hard to look away from the outrageous priest abuse scandal too, as Retired pointed out. That's why these little debates about 'science versus religion' sound so silly to me now. I don't think Steven Hawking is any more an authority on what an alien might do than me or you. Same with the pope. I mean, Hawking is a very smart man, he went to Oxford, etc., but why he is even brought up in these so called 'news stories' is kind of goofy. Maybe there is a untapped set of readers that have nothing to chew on since the Weekly World News shut down.
  21. Did you just say that I only started this thread with the ulterior motive of ranting against the person that shot me? I started this thread exactly 8 days before I was shot. Here are some things that I believe, that haven't been altered during the course of this thread. The rules of debate are no more racist than a game of checkers. African-Americans commit the act of homicide 7 times more often than whites. Politicians, the national news, and Hollywood denounce racism, sexism, and homophobia so much, that it has become as ubiquitous as the very air we breathe. I don't know about you, but I don't consider the criminal justice system 'just another type of violence' as you seem to suggest. The parameter of guilt and innocence seems to be lost in this deflation. I believe that I had started the thread as 'making sense out of the racism position.' I suppose one question is 'what is racism?' My dictionary says that racism means 'discrimination based on the belief that by nature some races are superior.' I don't believe that races are by nature superior to other races.
  22. What do you mean 'anything beyond that is a fucked up representation.' 35% of the homicides are committed by blacks, and blacks make up less than 20% of the population. I don't have much feeling for anyone that pulls a gun on someone delivering food, and tries to kill them for pocket money. It happened to me twice in two years. In all seriousness, your accusations that I am a closet racist, or that I outed myself as a racist aren't true. I am advocating 'kicking African Americans to the curb.' That's your extrapolation. I maintain that I am not a racist, and that it's wrong to be one. If I was outing myself as a racist, I would say 'yeah, you're right, I'm a racist' or 'I don't like black people.' I wont make either one of those statements, because they aren't things that I believe in. Monday night, I was out playing my guitar with a black guy - we jammed out on the Ojays 'Love Train' and other songs for about an hour or two at the local bar. The economic disparity argument is a double edged sword. On one hand, it's true. The system can't absorb all the poor people in the country, black or white. On the other hand, there is a lot built into our culture that says these economic disparities make it ok for blacks to resort to violence, etc. Hence, the prisons are filled with blacks. I just watched a movie called Cadillac Records which documented the racism from the '50s. There was a cop in the movie that was taking Little Walter the famous harmonica player and banging his head on the roof of a car calling him the 'N' word. That's racism. I am bringing up a well known, well documented statistic. I am discussing my own personal experiences over the last 3 years. I am suggesting that it's not all economic, a lot of it is cultural. What the roots are of this cultural phenomenon is open to discussion. I don't believe that to be racist. I could appear on Oprah with the kid that shot me in the back of the head along with Kid Rock and say 'Oh, I know that it's your economic circumstances that made you try to kill me. I just want to say that I forgive you - you didn't really pull the trigger, society made you do it.' I'm not though. I am in correspondence with the St. Louis police department right now, and they might have me go in to try to have him identified in a line up in the coming weeks. If I can identify the guy, I am going to encourage the state's attorneys to prosecute him to the maximum sentence under the law for any attempted homicide.
  23. The political habit that now is rampant in the debate community of sifting every word and every expression for the hint of racism offends me. I am going to lose about $20,000 this year because of black crime. I almost lost my life. The debate community has turned itself inside out to offer Urban Debate Leagues, and all debate has turned into is people bitching about race. Am I offending anybody? I think much of the purpose in my postings has to do with how much I don't think people need to internalize an enormous amount of guilt about the issue of race. As whites, we aren't all closet racists as some of the literature or debate arguments might suggest. Internalizing things that you are aren't actually guilty of can be dangerous. False guilt trips from the left or the right can lead to a skewed sense of self. There is a part in the movie 'Resolved' where one of the African-American kids is arguing, and he says the word 'racist!' The camera abruptly zooms in on the face of a curly haired white kid sitting on the floor as if to suggest this is something that he needs to have shoved in his face. But he doesn't. The TV, the movies, his teachers - he is already hearing it all day every day. I worked with a young man named Eddie and a young girl named Desiree at my old store. They were both black, and these shooting incidents were hard for them too. It was hard for them working at the store after what happened to many of us. They knew what was going through our minds. I know that they were trying to make an honest living. The politics, the psychology can get very complex. I am going to stop writing on this thread now. I don't feel guilty bringing this up. I am interested in reading what some of the social scientific theories on the issue are.
  24. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Race_and_crime_in_the_United_States Here is an interesting excerpt from the wikkipedia. About half way down, it shows that in 2008, around 36% of the homicides were perpetrated by blacks and 32% were perpetrated by whites. Around 28% of the perpetrators were unknown. Blacks make up about 13% of the population, meaning that every 1% of the black population corresponds to 3% of the total homicides. White make up about 80% of the population, and account for about 33% of the homicides. This means that 1% of the white population corresponds to about .41% of the total homicides. 3 divided by .41 = 7.3. According to that 2008 chart in the wikkipedia, blacks commit homicide 7.3 times as often as whites. I am inclined to believe that the stats are true. In fact, I am even inclined to believe that blacks commit homicide at an even higher rate than this.Some scholars argue that the statistics are skewed, but I get the sense that most of the debate isn't about the validity of the statistics as much as it is the cause. Some argue that the the cause of the disparity is economic and not cultural. I certainly believe that economics and the history of slavery play an enormous role in this state of affairs. I also believe that these economic conditions have fostered a culture that seems to perpetuate this violence. Calling me 'retarded' or calling me 'a fucking racist' invites me to bite back with some kind of personal war of words, but I'm not going to. I would rather just simply state my opinion, and suggest that the debate community is stumbling over itself, hobbling itself, with it's own 'political correctness.'
×
×
  • Create New...