BruceVC

But to be fair I thought that post was directed towards Gromnir so I didnt think I needed to read it. I should have read it, my bad But now your comment towards my question unintentionally demonstrates why I get frustrated and confused by some of the anti-Obama and anti-Clinton comments you guys sometimes make You are an intelligent person who has some real life experience, you made a very controversial comment and I asked you why you would think that, For me you must have a theory or reason but it doesnt answer the question in anyway to read that Webster quote because thats just a opinion that is subjective and could or could not apply in some circumstances I want to know your personal view

No thats a simplification and dismissal of a social problem that does exist in some places in the USA There are real examples of police heavy handedness and racial profiling by some policemen in the USA, of course this doesnt apply to all policeman and there is real effort in many states to address this But what this has created is a reality where some people who are aligned to BLM will now embellish this problem and say things like " the police want to kill us " or " all police are racist " and of course these generalizations are untrue and unhelpful But this doesn't mean you can ignore the original issue of some police targeting African Americans unfairly

what they "don't talk about" is not same as multiple instances o' obama calling for the creation o' a national police force. it simple ain't. again, Gromnir has concerns 'bout a national police force, and such a thing is unconstitutional regardless, but the claim you made is simple untrue. the issues you raise is valid. am even agreeing with some o' what you say. no need to muck up the water with mischaracterization o' obama statements. HA! Good Fun! I do sometimes take the liberty of boiling a topic to it's simplest terms. But I have to say you are one of the few members on this forum who will recognize you may be wrong or at least your comments may be misplaced due to emotion. This is a positive character trait Hold up here Bruce. I am only agreeing with Grom in that yes, I did intentionally over simplify my statement to you when I said Obama is calling for a "nationalized" police force. He is way too smart to actually say something like that, that is so obviously unconstitutional. But as much as I respect Gromnir, he's wrong. That is EXACTLY what the President and his admin is trying to do. If you take the time to actually read the documents and articles I linked the committee that commissioned the Rand Corporation study, was created by his administration is is ultimately answerable to him. And it's very obvious in reading their findings they are trying to justify the creation of something that has never existed. So yes, mea culpa on quoting Obama's speech but I stand by my assertion on what he tried to do here. Now this may all be moot. In 120 days we will have a new President. Congress will only be in session for 41 of those 120 days.Very little is going to happen between now and then.But it is worth noting for those casting a vote in a few weeks what the intention was here. What !!! Oh so you not admitting you were wrong....I assumed Gromnirs point had convinced you ? I admit I didnt read the links because I simply dont believe for one second that Obama ever wanted to implement a federal police force...you know why I am so adamant I am right? What would be his reason for this? Please be honest

I hope Volo doesnt read this....he will have a field day expressing his horror at BLM being racist ...volo is very sensitive about these things

Oh, thats a good point. It would reveal his true wealth...but I do think he is telling the truth about this because this is the type of comment that eventually comes back to you

I see some forum members assumed this was about whether Trump had broken the law and this was a legal issue For me I didnt think Trump had broken the law but his tax returns are a very telling story around his integrity. He claims to have the business acumen to fix the economic woes of the USA because the USA under Obama has become inefficient and weak He is also a billionaire and even though he can find legal tax loopholes to avoid pay his fair share of tax if his tax returns revealed he was paying less tax than he should this would be a serious criticism of everything he claims to stand for ....again he would be revealed to be a hypocrite but this would be a much more serious accusation...." Trump isnt even paying his full tax and uses his business empire to pay less "

what they "don't talk about" is not same as multiple instances o' obama calling for the creation o' a national police force. it simple ain't. again, Gromnir has concerns 'bout a national police force, and such a thing is unconstitutional regardless, but the claim you made is simple untrue. the issues you raise is valid. am even agreeing with some o' what you say. no need to muck up the water with mischaracterization o' obama statements. HA! Good Fun! I do sometimes take the liberty of boiling a topic to it's simplest terms. But I have to say you are one of the few members on this forum who will recognize you may be wrong or at least your comments may be misplaced due to emotion. This is a positive character trait

That's a very elegantly phrased idea, but I think it's more of a two-way street. You can make laws forbidding discriminatory behavior, and maybe people won't hate the protected groups any less, but it will nonetheless result in less discrimination - which may make little difference from a philosophical standpoint, but I'm pretty sure that members of the group that is being discriminated against will appreciate the increase in their overall quality of life. Which is a worthy goal in itself. Moreover, when you codify the idea of discriminatory behavior as socially unacceptable (such as by making laws against it), that will shape the attitude of future generations in a fairly fundamental manner. It may not change minds in the now, but it will probably have an impact decades down the line. This is very true, we must legislate certain laws to prevent bigotry or rather it becomes one way to combat it It makes a difference, I see this in SA . I dont care about people who are homophobic...most of the time you cannot change there minds because there view is based on religious interpretation, I just dont want to hear them on radio stations or associate with them

Unfortunately every Western country has had to ensure things like " sexual orientation " or " the rights of the LGBT community " are legislated because we still grapple with real homophobia in many countries and cultures I am very supportive of the rights of the LGBT community and the way the supreme court in the USA legalised gay marriage was long overdue and had to be done because some of the states in the USA would always have pushed back on this Gay rights do matter but not to everyone. But for example I would never personally support a politician who was homophobic

He may not be a racist, but he's perfectly willing to exacerbate and exploit racial divisions if it helps to advance his and the left's agenda. Same goes for Hilzilla. Edit: Btw, did anyone notice how she lectured to not jump to conclusions after the latest terrorist attack, but immediately jumped to conclusions after the latest police shooting? You know every now and then you do say something I completely agree with. Since before he took office Obama has been floating the idea of a "national" police force to replace city, county, and state police. His exact words were that it would be as "well armed and well trained as the military". And since it would be an arm of the Federal Government and a law enforcement agency it would be under the control of the President. City, County, and State police do not answer to the Federal Government in any way. The answer only to the people and leaders of their community, county & State. That won't do for the left's vision of the future. So to advance his goal is is necessary for him to undermine and destroy credibility in local law enforcement whenever possible. And he has certainly done so a number of times in the last seven years. It's not racism which is a reactionary response. It's nihilism. There have been more than a few leaders in the history of the world who shared this trait with him. They are not remembered as good people by and large. Are you suggesting Obama is involved in a surreptitious and orchestrated campaign to undermine the police in the USA so he can replace them with a Federal police force....that doesn't exist ?

Its also very subjective....but here is something accurate. If I just change one or two things with WOD post "Trump may not be a racist, but he's perfectly willing to exacerbate and exploit racial divisions if it helps to advance his and the rights agenda. "

Volo you really dont understand much about Obama do you? This post is a very myopic view of what Obama stands for....how can you say " Obama is racist " ? I have never felt he was racist ?

Imagine how depressing the future of the USA would be if what you saying was true

we would be mighty amused if trump suggested such a thing. HA! Good Fun! ps tax returns. still no tax returns? Probably already has. If not, CNN will quote him as such. I can't quite get my mind around why the press feel the need to doctor his statements when the statements he makes are usually worse than what they concoct. yeah, trump does get ill-treatment from msnbc and cnn and elsewhere... though not near as much as trump claims. misleading headlines n' such from cnn and msnbc is common. such media behavior is strange given just how frequent trump actual says something complete idiotic or offensive. is even more strange 'cause it should be obvious at this point that those ardent trump supporters is not gonna be the least bit discouraged by being presented with yet another example o' trump ridiculousness. HA! Good Fun! ps http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2016/06/15/new-evidence-donald-trump-didn-t-pay-taxes.html so, tax returns? He wont release his tax returns, it should be seen as a serious indictment of Trump....what is he hiding? His supporters dont seem to care

Yes, they must be the most famous celebrity couple in the world?

I can understand how you can see this as hubris but he means it a positive way. Its not about him, its about his legacy...thats what matters. So yes African American should vote for Hilary Clinton because she plans to continue with the momentum of his legacy which benefits many minorities but its not at the expense of white people as Trump positions it

Glad we elected him. yaaaaaaaaaaaaay......what a....... victory

Well there may be some real relevance because as you know Angelina is a special envoy for the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) and since there is this humanitarian crisis is Aleppo maybe this is her way of raising attention Yes the divorce is real but the announcement may be strategic

http://www.tmz.com/2016/09/20/angelina-joile-files-for-divorce-brad-pitt/ Anyone interested in this one...come on !!! It is relevant on some levels

But even the article clearly says " someone who appears to be Hillary Clinton’s former private computer specialist " and " so while it’s impossible to know if it's definitely him, a number of breadcrumbs point in Combetta's direction " You guys are basing your view on speculation and hearsay that this person who asked this question is in fact Hilary Clinton's previous "computer specialist " There is no real evidence the person who asked the question on reddit is who he says he is. Does this not concern you that you making assumptions around his identity ?

http://motherboard.vice.com/read/hillary-clinton-tech-guy-asked-reddit-for-email-advice The sheer ineptitude is mind boggling. Guy goes to public forum to ask how to screw emails with an account that can be linked to his real name. And he's their "IT guy". This link is illogical and doesn't make sense The whole point of having an archive system for Ediscovery is you cannot strip an email address and then expect the data to be seen as consistent or not tampered with. You can edit a previously sent email but then when you resave it will reflect a completely different modified date. And even if somehow are able to do this on the backend server you cannot change the copy that is stored on the archive system. This is the point of " chain of custody " around email archiving/Ediscovery I dont believe this reddit story for one second, it makes no technical sense and I would encourage people to ignore this as the people propagating this as a " valid concern " dont understand much of how archive systems work or how the Electronic Discovery Reference model – EDRM is designed

Sorry I know nothing about this game, what was that video? It was very captivating and evocative

This appears to be linked to Islamic Extremism http://heavy.com/news/2016/09/ahmed-khan-rahami-wanted-poster-chelsea-23rd-street-bombing-explosion-suspect-name-photos-facebook-page-terrorist-tannerite/

You raise some interesting points, we agree on some things but disagree on most things Anyway we are so far divided on our views on certain topics there is no way we would convince each other so it seems pointless to continue this particular debate Until next time

Look we all hate our jobs but that doesn't mean we start philosophizing over the internet. Keep it together I think Barti should ask Volo what he thinks