Doesn’t Matter Who Wins the K Race; We’re All the Same

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Yes.

1. The "second stage" on which Warren is located for debates is picked randomly, not by chance of getting elected.

2. Idk what he's talking about in re the DNC propping Warren. I have not heard anything about that.

3. Idk what he's talking about in re the DNC supporting her because she's female. There are four other females in the race, no? (Maybe there are 5, possibly 6 or even 10... there are so many candidates right now, I don't know.)

I'd still have gone with Brokeahontas. But I too am, not infrequently, a child.

So you're saying I could have pointed out he was ignorant rather than racist? OK, I'll take that as a friendly amendment.

Re any derogatory name based on race: come on, dude.

[Pretty Little Flower]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

"Who's this crossing guard barking the definitions and judgments at us? What's his qualification to do so?"

Do you see what he is doing here? Sebastian inserts this faux-quote in the middle of a screed in which he is barking the definitions and judgments about when it's o.k. to use the words racist and misogynist, causing us to question what his qualifications are to do so. Completely. Straight. Faced. This kind of next-level posting used to be the norm here, before the endless political squabbling turned the entire board into a well of infinite banality. Let's up our game.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

So you're saying I could have pointed out he was ignorant rather than racist? OK, I'll take that as a friendly amendment.

Re any derogatory name based on race: come on, dude.

Yes. I saw it but figured he was in the sauce.

I think the name was a bit of trolling. He was fucking with me, as he does when I make predictions some think are nuts.

But I don't think I'm nuts about Warren. That "fairness" angle has a lot of bite to it. And she matches it with policy. And can explain it in simple terms. Which is why she uses "fairness" instead of the nebulous "inequality." People get into talking about inequality and develop a mouthful of marbles rather quickly, often ending with some dense riff on Piketty. Joe Voter isn't reading Piketty. He hasn't even read Adam Smith. But he gets getting fucked. And 2008 and what followed still feels like a dry ass-fucking. Bernie's resonating with that voter, but he's all about free college. Warren's talking about debt forgiveness for the forgotten, and how she's going to fuck all the people that have been unfairly making all the money and getting bailouts while Joe Voter lost his ass. Revenge is a compelling argument in the blue wall states, and Warren's the only one offering it.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Pretty Little Flower

Do you see what he is doing here? Sebastian inserts this faux-quote in the middle of a screed in which he is barking the definitions and judgments about when it's o.k. to use the words racist and misogynist, causing us to question what his qualifications are to do so. Completely. Straight. Faced. This kind of next-level posting used to be the norm here, before the endless political squabbling turned the entire board into a well of infinite banality. Let's up our game.

I'm post post next level. It's like Escher's "Relativity," all levels and angles at once.

Or just cycling through the flat circle of time - coming, coming, coming around, and around.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

still, now you can say some of your best friends are trumpers

Don't buy Sebby's bullshit. One of my partners (he's not a lawyer and he's a friend I grew up with in the city and have known for 40 years) is hardcore Trump. Another close friend I've known since junior high is a Trump idiot. And that's just a few of the people I know and actually like who voted for that piece of shit. Also, I'm surrounded by partners at work (here and Boston) who would sooner vote for Hitler than a Democrat.

It amazes me that anyone thinks people who live in NY (or any big city), surrounded by all different types of people from all over the world (which includes the South and Midwest)--rich and poor, all colors, all political stripes, LGBTQ, etc.--are somehow the ones who live in a bubble. The only bubbles that exist in this country are in the South, the Midwest, and apparently a disturbing number of suburbs. Hell, I drove through an area of Texas (not far outside of Dallas) where if you didn't belong to a mega church, you might as well stop talking to people altogether.

TM

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Don't buy Sebby's bullshit.

You'll have to be clear about which bullshit I was allegedly selling. I wasn't even part of this exchange.

It amazes me that anyone thinks people who live in NY (or any big city), surrounded by all different types of people from all over the world (which includes the South and Midwest)--rich and poor, all colors, all political stripes, LGBTQ, etc.--are somehow the ones who live in a bubble. The only bubbles that exist in this country are in the South, the Midwest, and apparently a disturbing number of suburbs. Hell, I drove through an area of Texas (not far outside of Dallas) where if you didn't belong to a mega church, you might as well stop talking to people altogether.

Visit DC. Most of the town thinks that what goes on in the beltway is the only reality of any consequence. My own family that lives there thinks that. There are all sorts of bubbles all over the country. It just depends on what criteria you're using. And "bubble" isn't even right word for this phenomenon. These places aren't shielded from outsiders. They just have inhabitants many of whom think their city or town or whatever mirrors reality elsewhere. It doesn't. I was just in two cities which, while located fairly close to one another, both over four or five (maybe more) hundred years old, and having people predominantly of similar backgrounds, could not have been more different.

Philly is not NY. NY is not DC. San Fran is not Boston. Peoria is not South Bend. Each place is filled with a certain number of people who think, however, that their unique town mirrors the rest of the world. In fact, cities, towns, villages, are all to a significant extent sui generis.

The "bubble" is in a person's head, not a function of the locale.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I'd still have gone with Brokeahontas. But I too am, not infrequently, a child.

"I would mock her for having Native American family, but why are people so quick to raise racism?"

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

"I would mock her for having Native American family, but why are people so quick to raise racism?"

I was talking about making fun of Trump, you humorless drip. https://www.inquisitr.com/5433856/br...maher-twitter/

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

You'll have to be clear about which bullshit I was allegedly selling. I wasn't even part of this exchange.

I think it's fairly clear that I was talking about politics, given the rest of the post. It's surprising that you don't get it, given how often you repeat how so many of us need to remove ourselves from our bubbles while at the same time touting your unique position of moving in and out of all sorts of political circles and cocktail parties.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Visit DC.

Sure thing. I'll schedule that now. What should I do first on my 30th time there?

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Philly is not NY. NY is not DC. San Fran is not Boston. Peoria is not South Bend.

Pure brilliance.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

Each place is filled with a certain number of people who think, however, that their unique town mirrors the rest of the world. In fact, cities, towns, villages, are all to a significant extent sui generis.

I don't know why I do this to myself.

Focus. I am talking specifically about how cities generally consist of many different types of people who are all exposed to many different types of people as well as ideas, and are forced to adjust to one another--at least way more so than huge fucking swaths of the country. And it's the people who inhabit those huge swaths who are the ones who like to point at those of us who live in cities and talk about the bubble we live in. It's fucking ridiculous.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The "bubble" is in a person's head, not a function of the locale.

Bullshit.

TM

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I was talking about making fun of Trump, you humorless drip. https://www.inquisitr.com/5433856/br...maher-twitter/

Maybe a familiarity with Bill Maher's oeuvre is table stakes for your set, but he is neither interesting nor funny. "_____ahontas" doesn't seem like a funny thing to call anyone, but whatever.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Maybe a familiarity with Bill Maher's oeuvre is table stakes for your set, but he is neither interesting nor funny. "_____ahontas" doesn't seem like a funny thing to call anyone, but whatever.

Well it’s “funny” with hate and payback baked in. Howard Stern was saying any Dem candidate has to call him something, “private parts grabbing Donald,” something. I hope we don’t need to get to that- that we just turn third party voters (hi Sebby!) and get the man out.

I’m not sure ahontas is the way to go, but if there is traction rave on! Note from my 23 and me I’m about the same Native American % as Ms. Warren. For that matter I’m 2.1% African, so I may start giving you all feedback there too.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

Maybe a familiarity with Bill Maher's oeuvre is table stakes for your set, but he is neither interesting nor funny. "_____ahontas" doesn't seem like a funny thing to call anyone, but whatever.

Who, Precious, pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

I loooooovvvvve Maher. Love him.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

Well it’s “funny” with hate and payback baked in. Howard Stern was saying any Dem candidate has to call him something, “private parts grabbing Donald,” something. I hope we don’t need to get to that- that we just turn third party voters (hi Sebby!) and get the man out.

I’m not sure ahontas is the way to go, but if there is traction rave on! Note from my 23 and me I’m about the same Native American % as Ms. Warren. For that matter I’m 2.1% African, so I may start giving you all feedback there too.

I’m a mutt from Sweden down to Ireland to outside Moscow. And apparently I robbed a mini mart in 1987.

I’m not calling that girl in Ackron. She can find her own way to pay for beauty school.

[Tyrone Slothrop]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

I loooooovvvvve Maher. Love him.

I'm so sorry. I think they have better treatments now.

[sebastian_dangerfield]

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop

I'm so sorry. I think they have better treatments now.

Along with Howard, Chris Rock, Seinfeld, Silverman, and few others who believe in true free speech including the right to offend if they feel like it in the name of humor, Maher is one of the last few sane men standing.

Rushdie, Hitchens (past, sadly), and countless politicians and even conservatives who know he’ll abuse them haven’t done his show for no good reason. They know he gets an audience who laughs at the objections you have to him.

You can assert Maher is a boring Carson clone (his delivery is stolen from Johnny), but you can’t say he offends you without also saying this: You’re oversensitive and need to grow a thicker skin.