IGX

DARTH wrote:OK, I think that the Left's way of using Racist as an automatic negative and a slur has actually redefined the term for a lot of my Right Wing buddies here. (Shit, the word Race itself is a misnomer, we are all one race, human, we do have different breeds, but i digress like I often do.)

Whenever something is based on race, it's racism, racist, racialist ect. Now that does not mean a moral judgement one way or another on it's surface. it's like Propaganda, it means information but since many shitty governments had Propaganda ministries we view the word to mean lies.

I think the thing that is getting some of your goats is you think BD is calling him a bigot. (well, I don't know his heart)

Good thing Scalia was racist by this definition. Fuck Affirmative action and fuck not looking at the outcomes of it. Statistically blacks have an average IQ of 70-80, that's not my opinion, that's what I have found when I've looked at about 5 different studies, many from Universities Turd or PL would never let their kids near as they are hotbeds of little fucking commies. It's just a fact. Does not mean all black people are borderline retards,just that if you took 100 of them, the average among them are a bit dim. There will also be a genius or 3 in that 100. Asians by the way edge out white folks, they have the highest on average IQs, we are right behind them than come "Hispanics" when they consider them separate from white, then Native American ( and that "Hispanic" they tend to use is effected by the fact that many so called Hispanics are a mix of Spanish blood and native American.) then come blacks. The lowest on most of these studies are aboriginal Australians.

So if you are going to pick 5 black kids over 5 white kids based solely on race, this is racist and there is a good chance that if you compared the 5 whites to the 5 blacks, at the top IQ range more of those 5 white will be there than of those 5 blacks.

Fuck, this is why I say on most applications for jobs or school, it should be illegal to ask your "Race", Should be completely on merit. No fucking "Racism" there!

Testiclaw wrote:

DARTH wrote:OK, I think that the Left's way of using Racist as an automatic negative and a slur has actually redefined the term for a lot of my Right Wing buddies here. (Shit, the word Race itself is a misnomer, we are all one race, human, we do have different breeds, but i digress like I often do.)

Whenever something is based on race, it's racism, racist, racialist ect. Now that does not mean a moral judgement one way or another on it's surface. it's like Propaganda, it means information but since many shitty governments had Propaganda ministries we view the word to mean lies.

I think the thing that is getting some of your goats is you think BD is calling him a bigot. (well, I don't know his heart)

Good thing Scalia was racist by this definition. Fuck Affirmative action and fuck not looking at the outcomes of it. Statistically blacks have an average IQ of 70-80, that's not my opinion, that's what I have found when I've looked at about 5 different studies, many from Universities Turd or PL would never let their kids near as they are hotbeds of little fucking commies. It's just a fact. Does not mean all black people are borderline retards,just that if you took 100 of them, the average among them are a bit dim. There will also be a genius or 3 in that 100. Asians by the way edge out white folks, they have the highest on average IQs, we are right behind them than come "Hispanics" when they consider them separate from white, then Native American ( and that "Hispanic" they tend to use is effected by the fact that many so called Hispanics are a mix of Spanish blood and native American.) then come blacks. The lowest on most of these studies are aboriginal Australians.

So if you are going to pick 5 black kids over 5 white kids based solely on race, this is racist and there is a good chance that if you compared the 5 whites to the 5 blacks, at the top IQ range more of those 5 white will be there than of those 5 blacks.

Fuck, this is why I say on most applications for jobs or school, it should be illegal to ask your "Race", Should be completely on merit. No fucking "Racism" there!

There have actually been some companies that reduce applications to serial numbers, and remove all personal information; race, age, name, etc.

I get what AA is designed for, I honestly do, but the serial number deal seems the most fair in terms of employment.

Testiclaw wrote:Oh, and you're a conservative racist blowhard and you should kill yourself by choking on Hillary's dick.

:)

powerlifter54 wrote:
We will have to agree to disagree, and i will let you know on the mail. Will know fairly soon when i am back to random testing!

nafod wrote:The whole originalism thing...I don't think the founders could contemplate the Internet, cryptography, nuclear weapons, upcoming directed energy weapons, the ability to genetically modify ourselves, the ability of modern medicine to pour buckets of money down a hole, the potential to grow humans in test tubes someday, the potential for AI created fresh or having yourself uploaded, who owns your own DNA signature, etc. Trying to tease out which of the Constitution's original deep thoughts speaks to these thoroughly new and unforeseen issues has to require some staring at ink blots and seeing patterns.

TerryB wrote:

nafod wrote:The whole originalism thing...I don't think the founders could contemplate the Internet, cryptography, nuclear weapons, upcoming directed energy weapons, the ability to genetically modify ourselves, the ability of modern medicine to pour buckets of money down a hole, the potential to grow humans in test tubes someday, the potential for AI created fresh or having yourself uploaded, who owns your own DNA signature, etc. Trying to tease out which of the Constitution's original deep thoughts speaks to these thoroughly new and unforeseen issues has to require some staring at ink blots and seeing patterns.

maybe we should write a new constitution every few years

YOU'RE AN IDIOT!

dead man walking wrote:scalia knew without question that jefferson wanted bush to be president. it was written.

your naysaying is troubling, perhaps seditious.

johno wrote:What is controversial about words having an accepted, agreed-on meaning?

Turdacious wrote:Still waiting for a coherent explanation as to why Scalia was such a racist, other than being one of the votes that limited affirmative action.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:What is controversial about words having an accepted, agreed-on meaning?

Turdacious wrote:Still waiting for a coherent explanation as to why Scalia was such a racist, other than being one of the votes that limited affirmative action.

Language is a curious thing. As much as you'd like things to mean the same thing to you as they mean to everyone else...everyone else (in sum) are actually the ones who's votes make the larger difference. Ergo...when large number of persons react to a statement as racist, or see a pattern of pervasive bigotry in your language, you are in fact, acting racist. Sorry. Shades of intention have very use here. This is not to say I give two fucks for those SJW's who cry wolf constantly on the topic or those who are genuinely aggrieved by racism. I truly do not, racism is a forgivable logical fallacy. Self delusion is not.

There's at least a dozen new-sources of varying mainstream political shades that you could review if either of you, Johno or you Turd, wanted to actually UNDERSTAND originalism or Scalia. Those of use who have attempted to perform cranio-rectal extractions on you in the past have no need to watch a full grown man in the throes of Dunning–Kruger tantrum.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote:

johno wrote:What is controversial about words having an accepted, agreed-on meaning?

Turdacious wrote:Still waiting for a coherent explanation as to why Scalia was such a racist, other than being one of the votes that limited affirmative action.

Language is a curious thing. As much as you'd like things to mean the same thing to you as they mean to everyone else...everyone else (in sum) are actually the ones who's votes make the larger difference. Ergo...when large number of persons react to a statement as racist, or see a pattern of pervasive bigotry in your language, you are in fact, acting racist. Sorry. Shades of intention have very use here. This is not to say I give two fucks for those SJW's who cry wolf constantly on the topic or those who are genuinely aggrieved by racism. I truly do not, racism is a forgivable logical fallacy. Self delusion is not.

There's at least a dozen new-sources of varying mainstream political shades that you could review if either of you, Johno or you Turd, wanted to actually UNDERSTAND originalism or Scalia. Those of use who have attempted to perform cranio-rectal extractions on you in the past have no need to watch a full grown man in the throes of Dunning–Kruger tantrum.

Do you teach communications at Mizzou? That's a whole lot of words for not answering a reasonable question. Just say 'I don't know' next time.

And, pro tip here, johno and I are not the same person.

Blaidd Drwg wrote:Pro tip. Read the words and google the ones that are too hard.

It's a waste of time discussing anything of nuance with you. I'd sooner listen to you drone on about catechism than try to source material you won't bother reading.

PS...I am truly surprised you can't draw the thread between Johno's quote and your own. Thanks for that. Surprises are fun.

Turd wrote:I dont click thinks

Blaidd Drwg wrote:This is why no one takes you seriously when you're tying to be serious. You simply are quite bad at it.

Everyone knows I know exactly what I'm talking about. I bothered to read and think about the legacy of a man I generally found disagreeable, regressive and silly. Upon reading and reflection, I changed my perspective. This is something Everyone knows you have very limited capacity for.

Here you can read the article and and transcript and decide how you feel. Some are clunky, some are on point, some refute my assertion entirely. You have now achieved one of your modest successes in this world which is to get a grown man to google shit for you. Kudos.

http://www.newsweek.com/scalia-comments ... ism-403823
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/262 ... disturbing
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/spencer-o ... 03845.html
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/25 ... e-20130625
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/4 ... not-racism
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/feb/28 ... m-20130228
http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2015/12/ ... -admission
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... acism-over
http://www.salon.com/2016/02/16/antonin ... _millions/
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... stice.html

Peniel E. Joseph is Professor of History at Tufts University and the author of the award-winning Waiting ‘Til the Midnight Hour: A Narrative History of Black Power in America and Dark Days, Bright Nights: From Black Power to Barack Obama as well as editor of The Black Power Movement: Rethinking the Civil Rights-Black Power Era and Neighborhood Rebels: Black Power at the Local Level.

Dr. Joseph is the founder of a growing subfield in American History and Africana Studies that he has characterized as "Black Power Studies" which is actively rewriting postwar American and African American History as well as related interdisciplinary fields of Africana Studies, law and society, sociology, political science, Women's and Ethnic Studies, philosophy, anthropology, literary studies, and American Studies to name a few.

Blaidd Drwg wrote: the notion that being a legal scholar gives you something important to say about racism by way of your background. This is nonsensical, we're talking about a reaction to social issues not a legal analysis.

Turdacious wrote:

Blaidd Drwg wrote: the notion that being a legal scholar gives you something important to say about racism by way of your background. This is nonsensical, we're talking about a reaction to social issues not a legal analysis.

Which is funny, because my original question was about legal analysis in the context of social issue (i.e. purported racism).