BruceVC

Yes, thats an accurate observation. One of the main criticisms I had for the USA was this incongruous social reality where you had the greatest, influential and significant country of the Western world which in turn means it has the most influence in the world and you have this respected Constitution and value human rights yet homophobia was still fairly rife in some states. Yes it was more the views of Conservative Christians but it did create a a strange inconsistency, the world expects a country like the USA to have addressed tolerance around gay rights Thats why I said to GD the way the supreme court basically made gay marriage mandatory was necessary because if you left it up to the states then there would still be states who would refuse to allow gay people to marry...so sometimes in society you need to legislate social changes because human beings dont always do the right thing

So if Jennifer Lawrence was married and having sex with someone outside that marriage - even if all parties involved, even her spouse, had consented to it -, she'd deserve having the Internet plastered with videos of that? I assumed you would say I was contradicting myself but I am not as I always look at the context and the nuances with this type of event And yes there is a difference between Hogan and his lifestyle choices and someone like Jennifer Lawrence No, there isn't. The only real difference is that one has a "hoohah" and one has a "wee wee". Both had photos of them being hacked and put on display on the internet. And when Jennifer asked to have hers taken down Gawker did, because she was a she. When Hulk Hogan asked to have his removed, they doubled down and threw up the middle fingers to him. And before you say "But people are losing their jobs!" Realize, this entire thing has caused Hulk himself to be declared "Un-person" by the largest wrestling promotion in the world (his former employer WWE). The only other time that I can remember this happening with a wrestler was the murder suicide of Chris Benoit. (WWE keeps most of hits big talent of the old days on "Legend Contracts" that pay a living salary for sporadic appearances) Guys it always surprises me when people reject my suggestion that Hogan and Jennifer aren't the same....alum I am particularly surprised you disagree as you are normally aligned to these types of nuances Let me explain why they different. And to understand this point you have to forget any previous view you have that is similar to " of course they the same, its about Gawker publishing information of a tabloid nature " ...no they not as what matters is the person and there character...these points will obviously have different responses based on the person For example lets say Charlie Sheen was filmed during one of his sexual escapades....would the emphasis to " not embarrass him and get the video taken down " be the same as a video of Jennifer Lawrence having sex with her boyfriend?

That would be nice. Much more likely it will lead to the polar opposite. Those with radical views will use this to further erode our already dwindling freedoms, meanwhile the terrorists will continue to hate and kill us just the same. Come on, lets not think this will lead to another " now the government will erode our freedoms " rant The USA has very effective information gathering and the endeavors of the likes of the NSA and FBI have helped prevent numerous attacks but IMO this will be considered a " lone wolf " which are very difficult to prevent. So I dont see any new " monitoring of citizens " laws being passed? I don'r know how much more monitoring Big Brother COULD do. But I'm figuring the Gun Control nuts will come back with new promises of gun bans and gun confiscations. Because clearly the way to punish this is to take the private property away from everyone who did no wrong today. GD I have a different view now on Gun Control, so let it not be said I dont reflect on my opinion on matters and change my opinion as it serves a greater common good I no longer think that Gun Control laws should be enforced, despite all the evidence that supports a reduction in violent crimes. I have come to the conclusion that the topic has become too divisive in the modern age of USA politics and is more political now than a valid societal change? So its now used to criticize all people who own guns and this is seen as a form of attack by many Americans on there culture and history. And even if I say " no this is not an attack on your personal liberty " this is not how you see it and your view does matter I just feel there are enough progressive social changes in the USA that you have accepted its best to leave the Gun Control laws alone And it was your criticism towards my view last time that helped shape my new opinion. You basically said " You dont like the way people are being condescending and telling you what guns they can keep or be allowed to own '' ...you are right in some ways. When Hilary says things like " we must reign these wayward gun owners " it can be seen in a patronizing manner, I understand that view But efforts to enforce Gun Control are not suppose to be about surreptitious control of the population or suggestions that the average American cant take care of guns...no its suppose to be about reducing deaths through gun control. But the point is the intention is misunderstood and that causes unnecessary consternation And finally I want someone like you to be happy overall with most of the social changes happening in the USA...its because you represent a very important demographic in the USA and your support is needed..do you know why you are so important? I am surprised to hear you have shifted your views on something. Even if only by degree. I told you participating in a forum where you will hear a diverse array of onions opinions was a healthy thing. (That typo was so funny I had to leave it in!) There is one huge difference between your philosophy of life, society, economics, and politics and mine, And this is not a criticism, merely an observation. You place great value on motivations. You first thought on any policy or subject is something to the tune of "is this good?" "Does this mean well"? I do not even consider motivation. It is not even a blip on my radar. I focus 100% on outcomes. What will something actually do? But this thread is about a specific thing and I don't want to be the one to derail it so reply if you wish, I won't retort. GD sometimes it may appear I only focus on certain SJ issues or support certain politicians like Hilary and I am biased towards minorities and I may seem to ignore certain facts but I am aware of some of the issues you guys raise, I just dont think they have the ramifications you raise...so for me its about priorities But sometimes I think some of these social changes that espouse the Obama legacy get misunderstood..and the outcome is a fractured US as there seems to be a campaign, that you believe. to undermine certain core American values and a selective targeting of white people...or rather white males Now this is where you come in to the point, you symbolically represent a very important demographic in the USA. And sometimes I think you forget how important you are...you are a white, male who has worked hard, served your country and paid your taxes. You have contributed in your own way to the USA being the economic success it is. Of course you matter, you always have and its important you recognize it....even though it probably doesnt feel like anyone cares about your contribution if you vanished it would create a negative outcome So finally and this is the most important point, everything Obama has done and Clinton want to do is about addressing real and perceived social and economic imbalances that certain sectors of US society grapple with. Nothing is an intentional attack on white males....its just certain social developments are based on this like BLM and then some supporters of these movements will bring race into it and generalize about topics and issues which in turn marginalizes some white folk who feel they are being blamed for events they have no influence in I have been dealing with this in the new SA for 20 years, I am very positive and believe in the economic transformation of SA but I only started believing this in the last 5 years. It took a paradigm shift in my way of thinking about the past and Apartheid before I started being seeing things in a more honest and accurate light..and trust me its easy to only see negative in a country like SA, if you going through what White people have gone through do these points apply to you You achieved your success at work through hard work and diligence and didnt do it at the expense of minorities You find certain groups in society claim they are at an economic and societal disadvantage to achieve success..even though you had similar challengers You find certain reasons for a social challenge being blamed on things like " white capital " or " white privileged " There is a narrative that highlights the fact that white people need to distribute there wealth to address the past injustice where white people only became wealthy at the expense of minorities I dont agree with any of these completely but if these apply to you then I can help you rationalize them?

Mmmm....I would say right to bear arms is more important ?

To be fair, the way American culture fetishizes guns is absolutely worth criticizing, and if I had a magic wand that could somehow either make that stupid, childish fantasy of "guns = freedom and rugged individualism" or the guns themselves disappear, I'd definitely choose the former. Yes, I agree with you that from an outsiders perspective it does seem irrational...but we mustn't underestimate how divisive trying to enforce Gun Control is being seen or how it will be received. Trust me on this one...rather let the folks keep there guns

That would be nice. Much more likely it will lead to the polar opposite. Those with radical views will use this to further erode our already dwindling freedoms, meanwhile the terrorists will continue to hate and kill us just the same. Come on, lets not think this will lead to another " now the government will erode our freedoms " rant The USA has very effective information gathering and the endeavors of the likes of the NSA and FBI have helped prevent numerous attacks but IMO this will be considered a " lone wolf " which are very difficult to prevent. So I dont see any new " monitoring of citizens " laws being passed? I don'r know how much more monitoring Big Brother COULD do. But I'm figuring the Gun Control nuts will come back with new promises of gun bans and gun confiscations. Because clearly the way to punish this is to take the private property away from everyone who did no wrong today. GD I have a different view now on Gun Control, so let it not be said I dont reflect on my opinion on matters and change my opinion as it serves a greater common good I no longer think that Gun Control laws should be enforced, despite all the evidence that supports a reduction in violent crimes. I have come to the conclusion that the topic has become too divisive in the modern age of USA politics and is more political now than a valid societal change? So its now used to criticize all people who own guns and this is seen as a form of attack by many Americans on there culture and history. And even if I say " no this is not an attack on your personal liberty " this is not how you see it and your view does matter I just feel there are enough progressive social changes in the USA that you have accepted its best to leave the Gun Control laws alone And it was your criticism towards my view last time that helped shape my new opinion. You basically said " You dont like the way people are being condescending and telling you what guns they can keep or be allowed to own '' ...you are right in some ways. When Hilary says things like " we must reign these wayward gun owners " it can be seen in a patronizing manner, I understand that view But efforts to enforce Gun Control are not suppose to be about surreptitious control of the population or suggestions that the average American cant take care of guns...no its suppose to be about reducing deaths through gun control. But the point is the intention is misunderstood and that causes unnecessary consternation And finally I want someone like you to be happy overall with most of the social changes happening in the USA...its because you represent a very important demographic in the USA and your support is needed..do you know why you are so important?

That would be nice. Much more likely it will lead to the polar opposite. Those with radical views will use this to further erode our already dwindling freedoms, meanwhile the terrorists will continue to hate and kill us just the same. Come on, lets not think this will lead to another " now the government will erode our freedoms " rant The USA has very effective information gathering and the endeavors of the likes of the NSA and FBI have helped prevent numerous attacks but IMO this will be considered a " lone wolf " which are very difficult to prevent. So I dont see any new " monitoring of citizens " laws being passed?

Yes Volo, we all know that. These Islamic extremists are truly reprehensible but even within ISIS they have groups they hate more than others. For example captured Sunni Muslims are often released or absorbed..but Yadzis', Coptic Christian and members of the LGBT community would be targeted for execution and murder

Volo this is probably the wrong time for you to try to "catch me " out because you dont understand how certain global dynamics work...this time your ignorance comes across as insensitive and callous Homosexuality is anathema in the Muslim world ,,,they really reject it and its the death penalty in some ME countries. So you understand how ISIS views it? So this terrorist would have focused his rage and vitriol and hatred on anything US but also what he personally despises...gay people. So yes this will end up being an attack on the US but also selective targeting of the LGBT community

Its apparently the highest number in the USA? 50 may seem an inordinate number but most clubs and gay clubs normally have lots of people packed into a tight space....so that number can be reasonable

OMG !! 53 killed and the extremist targeted a gay bar, members of the LGBT are still targeted unreasonably by some ...I am getting tired of these types of attacks and the justification for them

I consider you one of the most logical people I have ever met on the Internet, you are such a formidable person to debate with because you typically debate from a position of facts which is shaped by your own life experiences, this makes most of your debating views irrefutable IMO and I find many people on forums debate from emotions which at times frustrate me as I debate normally from facts. So I only raised this Veal question because it seemed you were making a decision about Veal which was based on emotion....but you have explained what you mean and I understand your point even if I have different view From my side I consider myself a gastronome, I eat at restaurants fairly regularly and I am huge watcher of the various cooking channels. I also try to eat everything that some people would consider " exotic ". I am a true supporter of classic European culinary themes...and this includes French This is why I always try to order food like Veal and the unctuous and delicious Foie Gras when available. I agree that how the ducks get treated is cruel but I wont let that dissuade me from eating it as it is an established part of French food and I cant embrace the good and ignore the bad in French gastronomy And finally, and I think the most relevant, is you have that understandable view around " wingly purchase meat that were procured through cruelty would be antithetical " ..I admire this form of empathy but its not something that is relevant to me as I dont have the background to understand what this means in practical terms, and I dont mean about obvious things like "we dont eat dolphins "

Okay I hadn't read it and started now but I see it makes some serious accusations against Hilary, I need time to go through it properly but I will respond So... I'm curious to hear your opinion. Okay I read the article and yes its concerning...the guy seems to be banker so what possible reason should he on that intelligence board? So just to clarify somethings This intelligence committee he was on, what exactly is it called and what is its core purpose? This is very important How do people generally get asked to sit on these types of boards...in other words how would be selected and by who? I'll make this nice and simple. He bought a favor from her. Because that is how she is. Bill is not better. Their influence is for sale and he bought it. But GD that is hearsay, I try never to believe conjecture around politics That way I find myself far less critical and annoyed by certain political developments Well far be it from me to draw conclusions for you. Allow me to link a few credible news sources: From Townhall.com, the Clinton Foundation which is supposed to be a charity has been accepting millions in unreported "donations" from foreign interests who were receiving favorable treatment from the State Dept. while she was SecState: http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/03/31/hillary-believe-me-weve-been-very-transparent-about-clinton-foundation-donations-n2141514 181 Donations to the Clinton Foundations were from lobbyists who also received preferential contracts from the State Dept http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2016/03/31/hillary-believe-me-weve-been-very-transparent-about-clinton-foundation-donations-n2141514 Russia (who you don't like) recently bought a Canadian mining company that has mining interests in the US. Uranium mining. Since Uranium is a "strategic" asset the purchase required approval from the US Government. That approval was based on a recommendation from the SecState, one Hillary Clinton. Prior to her granting her recommendation the Russian President of the new company, Uranium One, "donated" $2.35M to the Clinton Foundation. The Clinton Foundation DID NOT report that donation to the IRS as required by law. After the "donation" Uranium One got it's approval and Russian owned interests control 20% of the worlds uranium production. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/24/us/cash-flowed-to-clinton-foundation-as-russians-pressed-for-control-of-uranium-company.html?_r=0 & http://nypost.com/2015/04/23/understanding-the-influence-peddling-of-clinton-inc/ Liberal journalist Juan Williams even pointed out the hypocrisy and unethical behavior of Hillary Clinton for opposing the Keystone Pipeline while accepting "donations" from the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Oman, etc. Gee Bruce, do you know what those countries have in common with each other besides terrorism, brutal treatment of women and lot of camel dung? Could it be oil? What was the Keystone pipeline about again? Oh that's right, Canadian oil. http://www.weeklystandard.com/juan-williams-foreign-donations-to-clinton-foundation-unethical-rank-influence-peddling/article/858124. And of course one way to secure the support of superdelegates is to ask Clinton Foundation "donors" to help them in their own campaigns. That at least is legal but it sure don't smell good. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/26/nyregion/protege-of-hillary-and-bill-clintons-targets-us-congressional-seat.html?partner=rss&emc=rss&smid=tw-nytimes&smtyp=cur&_r=1 So, I'm curious Bruce, what do you think about this? Firstly I appreciate the way you made this post, you have used different examples but provided links I can reference. This is the most effective way to engage with me as I only make points I can support with links if required and if someone wants to make a controversial point then how you have done it is ideal....and of course I value the effort you put in as I can possibly learn something new I need to go through these links so I understand the criticism but I will go through them all and respond as I want see if I'm missing something about Hilary

I assumed you would say I was contradicting myself but I am not as I always look at the context and the nuances with this type of event And yes there is a difference between Hogan and his lifestyle choices and someone like Jennifer Lawrence

Okay I hadn't read it and started now but I see it makes some serious accusations against Hilary, I need time to go through it properly but I will respond So... I'm curious to hear your opinion. Okay I read the article and yes its concerning...the guy seems to be banker so what possible reason should he on that intelligence board? So just to clarify somethings This intelligence committee he was on, what exactly is it called and what is its core purpose? This is very important How do people generally get asked to sit on these types of boards...in other words how would be selected and by who? I'll make this nice and simple. He bought a favor from her. Because that is how she is. Bill is not better. Their influence is for sale and he bought it. But GD that is hearsay, I try never to believe conjecture around politics That way I find myself far less critical and annoyed by certain political developments

Do baby cows not matter to you? You monster!! Seriously though, if you're always taking the high moral ground at the very least try to hide your sins. I mean you're just inviting Volo to bugger you about how horrible you are for eating young animals. Do you think most members on this forum care about the plight of young cows and or sometimes the cruelness about where Veal comes from well, we won't eat veal or foie gras precisely 'cause o' the lack o' humanity involved in raising and slaughtering o' the animals. all our meats is purchased from a reputable local butcher, but we do not pretend that we know the conditions that exist where all our pork, poultry and beef is raised. *shrug* am a human who needs at least some meat protein to stay healthy. also, we like meat. gotta be some advantages to being at the top o' the food chain, and it ain't as if the animals have any empathy for Gromnir. we no longer hunt. as a kid we hunted in large part out of need. frequent went months when only meat we had were what Gromnir or grandpa could acquire. however, without need to motivate us, we no longer find personal gratification in dispatching deer, bear, turkey and the like. *sigh* most common were actual rabbit. doesn't sound as impressive, eh? somehow managed to never get sick o' fried rabbit. ... made us hungry for buttermilk fried rabbit. HA! Good Fun! ps am an admitted hypocrite regarding the hunting bit as we will happily cook game meats our acquaintances provide. can't make our bigos w/o venison and wild pig. Do baby cows not matter to you? You monster!! Seriously though, if you're always taking the high moral ground at the very least try to hide your sins. I mean you're just inviting Volo to bugger you about how horrible you are for eating young animals. Do you think most members on this forum care about the plight of young cows and or sometimes the cruelness about where Veal comes from well, we won't eat veal or foie gras precisely 'cause o' the lack o' humanity involved in raising and slaughtering o' the animals. all our meats is purchased from a reputable local butcher, but we do not pretend that we know the conditions that exist where all our pork, poultry and beef is raised. *shrug* am a human who needs at least some meat protein to stay healthy. also, we like meat. gotta be some advantages to being at the top o' the food chain, and it ain't as if the animals have any empathy for Gromnir. we no longer hunt. as a kid we hunted in large part out of need. frequent went months when only meat we had were what Gromnir or grandpa could acquire. however, without need to motivate us, we no longer find personal gratification in dispatching deer, bear, turkey and the like. *sigh* most common were actual rabbit. doesn't sound as impressive, eh? somehow managed to never get sick o' fried rabbit. ... made us hungry for buttermilk fried rabbit. HA! Good Fun! ps am an admitted hypocrite regarding the hunting bit as we will happily cook game meats our acquaintances provide. can't make our bigos w/o venison and wild pig. Gromnir I appreciate your honesty around this topic, I have a few questions to ask you because what you posted is similar to what many people I know say about why they don't eat Veal, normally I wouldn't even raise this with someone who made similar claims ...but I am looking forward to your comments as I know they will be based on facts mostly. So for me I see a contradiction in what you say. I am not trying to put you on the spot but I know you can have this debate in a constructive way Okay so you say you won't eat Veal or Foie Gras due to the perceived conditions of how the animals are treated, you probably aware of this but due to the negative public attention much Veal farming has improved the conditions of how the animals are treated and of course you get Veal that has different ages ...so the reality is most Veal you eat comes from the age of 25-35 weeks, thats a reasonable age to live to I would say ? Now you admit you dont know where the meat from your local butchery comes from yet you eat it, I dont blame you for this lack of interest in the history of your local meat...this is normal for most people. Yet you could be eating meat from questionable farmers and that doesn't bother you but you wont eat Veal...and this is from a historical way the animals are treated. It just seems illogical for you to not eat Veal? So the point Im making is " its okay to eat most types of Veal nowadays "..and this comment is based on the new reality of Veal farming? We are huge hunters in SA, not me personally but I have friends who are hardcore hunters and spend weeks in the bush during hunting season.

You raise an interesting point .....no I didnt do any of those things you mentioned. I always had male friends but I was raised in a matriarch society and when I left school all my groups of friends had men and women in the groups so I had no interest in "malebonding " ? But talking about female co-workers boobs size would be very inappropriate...but when I am at home with my friends I will comment about women who I find attractive but I think I do it in a way that doesn't objectify them Interesting, I have no further questions. But it explains a lot, i have taken a lot for granted. Meshugger I am always really interested in what people think motivates me and what I really stand for when it comes to a forum like this, so please elaborate a little further ? I know some people have a negative view of me and sometimes that has been my fault but after reading LK long opinion of me I realized just how bad and incorrect some opinions of me are...and if I can change it when it comes to some members I would like to. Of course there are some people who dont like me and thats okay because I dont mind them disliking me And this is not one of those attempts where I actually want people to now respond to my post with comments " I like you, you not so bad ". I do know the people on this forum who interact with me and I appreciate there efforts to engage with me But going back to what you mentioned about "it explains a lot "...what do you mean? Why would my response mean that..and please be honest as I do appreciate constructive criticism

Do baby cows not matter to you? You monster!! Seriously though, if you're always taking the high moral ground at the very least try to hide your sins. I mean you're just inviting Volo to bugger you about how horrible you are for eating young animals. Do you think most members on this forum care about the plight of young cows and or sometimes the cruelness about where Veal comes from Talking about eating meat. one of the brothers after being a vegetarian for the last 25 years or so has no decided he is going vegan !!! I think people who take this extreme step are doing it for attention, also becoming Vegan is something that only people who have money to waste would do it ...in most third world countries the average citizen cant afford to become vegan I now find a chuckle from people going Vegan to avoid damage to animals. In one of the Joe Rogan podcast the subject came up and the argument that they displace a lot of the habitats of wild animals because of these organic farms that are exclusively vegan. Or how there have been experiments that some plants and fungi have sentience. Yes thats my brothers reason for now becoming vegan....he says its about cruelty to animals? I want to research more about Joe Rogan because if that is true about the organic farm that is exactly the type of story I love sharing with my brother because he thinks his lifestyle choice is ultimately going to benefit the planet

This is the type of criticism I dont understand....why is a photo with Hilary and and another women holding doughnuts considered funny or strange? Sigh. Look at the donuts and think of the female reproductive system. Okay thanks for explaining, I still dont see any humor in the photo but we all have different things that amuse us Do you actually hang out with other men? Like childhood friends? Just curious. No I dont ? Why do you think that matters...what would I gain Malebonding usually entails such humor, especially among good friends that you can confide in. When you phrase it as "something to gain", it sounds like you do not understand the concept to begin with. Just to be really sure and there's no language-barrier. I am talking about the camaradiere from going out fishing/hunting on a weekend with your friends, drinking, talking about which female co-worker having the biggest boobs, who was the biggest **** in high-school, your and your friends earlier conquests, all those might've-beens or should've-hads, toilet humor and so on. Fascinating in itself that you aren't aware of it. You raise an interesting point .....no I didnt do any of those things you mentioned. I always had male friends but I was raised in a matriarch society and when I left school all my groups of friends had men and women in the groups so I had no interest in "malebonding " ? But talking about female co-workers boobs size would be very inappropriate...but when I am at home with my friends I will comment about women who I find attractive but I think I do it in a way that doesn't objectify them

Okay I hadn't read it and started now but I see it makes some serious accusations against Hilary, I need time to go through it properly but I will respond So... I'm curious to hear your opinion. Okay I read the article and yes its concerning...the guy seems to be banker so what possible reason should he on that intelligence board? So just to clarify somethings This intelligence committee he was on, what exactly is it called and what is its core purpose? This is very important How do people generally get asked to sit on these types of boards...in other words how would be selected and by who?

Do baby cows not matter to you? You monster!! Seriously though, if you're always taking the high moral ground at the very least try to hide your sins. I mean you're just inviting Volo to bugger you about how horrible you are for eating young animals. Do you think most members on this forum care about the plight of young cows and or sometimes the cruelness about where Veal comes from Talking about eating meat. one of the brothers after being a vegetarian for the last 25 years or so has no decided he is going vegan !!! I think people who take this extreme step are doing it for attention, also becoming Vegan is something that only people who have money to waste would do it ...in most third world countries the average citizen cant afford to become vegan

This is the type of criticism I dont understand....why is a photo with Hilary and and another women holding doughnuts considered funny or strange? Sigh. Look at the donuts and think of the female reproductive system. Okay thanks for explaining, I still dont see any humor in the photo but we all have different things that amuse us Do you actually hang out with other men? Like childhood friends? Just curious. No I dont ? Why do you think that matters...what would I gain

My friends who have never ever played WOW want us to go watch this movie at IMAX I told them its not good based on the general feedback from gamers, imagine non-gamers watching it?

This is the type of criticism I dont understand....why is a photo with Hilary and and another women holding doughnuts considered funny or strange? Sigh. Look at the donuts and think of the female reproductive system. Okay thanks for explaining, I still dont see any humor in the photo but we all have different things that amuse us

This is the type of criticism I dont understand....why is a photo with Hilary and and another women holding doughnuts considered funny or strange?