Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520662)

1. Have no consequential arrests;
2. Have had no mental health issues;
3. No history of enjoying recreational drugs and not disavowing them rigorously;
4. No libertine sexual exploits;
5. No admitted atheism;
6. No bisexuality;
7. No affairs (for which you haven't repented to some megachurch minister)

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 520678)

Also, the story the cop tells the Klan to get immediately accepted as a bona fide racist is nearly EXACTLY the same one that Liam Neeson tells. It's a sister instead of unidentified relative, but it's nearly identical.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 520669)

You have the ability to write a thoughtful post and then completely fuck it up in an instant. Jesus Christ.

Of course you can flip out over what Neeson said. He said he actually went out with a weapon looking for trouble so that he could fucking kill a random, innocent black person. That shit is not normal. Sure he's grown from it. Sure he lived in a place of daily, awful violence. I'll even give him the benefit of the doubt that he's a completely different person. But you don't get to say shit like that without people freaking the fuck out. The key is to have a thoughtful discussion. You started to and then, being Sebby, you completely fucked it all up.

I wish Robin Roberts had engaged him on this constant in the white community--and I've heard it so many fucking times: People of color who commit some heinous crime or do something awful have that action attributed to their race. White people who do the same are bad eggs. People of color who accomplish amazing things (or any level of success) (i) benefited from some type of assistance because of their color and/or (ii) have that success attributed to them as an individual, despite their race. That's why he was looking for any black person at all.

When asked by Roberts if he would have gone out "hunting" random white people to murder if the white person was a racist, Liam Neesons automatically changed the hypo because he couldn't even conceive of just hunting white people. He said if it were a Scot or a Lithuanian he'd have gone looking for them. But he wasn't hunting black Brits or Nigerians or whatever. He was looking for any black person, period. The distinction didn't even occur to him.

TM

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520696)

It is reasonable to freak out at what Neeson said. I should have used a term more specific than “flipping out.” I’d say people calling for a boycott of him, or suggesting he needs to be exiled from his profession, need to get a grip. What he said was shocking, but it’s also the kind of honesty we need to address the issue. Added and Not Bob make a similar point when they admit they have had racist thoughts. But Liam is famous, and has admitted a truly violent racist thought. Those crying for him to pay a steep professional price do a huge disservice to their own ostensible goals.

My suspicion is most of those people are not terribly thoughtful, but more interested in publicly displaying outrage than actually addressing racism and the the issues caused by racism constructively.

ETA: If Neeson’s publicist were with him and heard him start that exchange, he or she would have jumped on the cameraman. Neeson is a sophisticated movie star. He knew he was taking a huge chance with that sort of honesty. This should not cost him a career where it’s clear he does not hold those views anymore, they were born of passion and social location at the time, and his intent is to assist in combatting racism.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520696)

It is reasonable to freak out at what Neeson said. I should have used a term more specific than “flipping out.” I’d say people calling for a boycott of him, or suggesting he needs to be exiled from his profession, need to get a grip. What he said was shocking, but it’s also the kind of honesty we need to address the issue. Added and Not Bob make a similar point when they admit they have had racist thoughts. But Liam is famous, and has admitted a truly violent racist thought. Those crying for him to pay a steep professional price do a huge disservice to their own ostensible goals.

My suspicion is most of those people are not terribly thoughtful, but more interested in publicly displaying outrage than actually addressing racism and the the issues caused by racism constructively.

ETA: If Neeson’s publicist were with him and heard him start that exchange, he or she would have jumped on the cameraman. Neeson is a sophisticated movie star. He knew he was taking a huge chance with that sort of honesty. This should not cost him a career where it’s clear he does not hold those views anymore, they were born of passion and social location at the time, and his intent is to assist in combatting racism.

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 520624)

I've talked to him a ton about Trump (early after he was sworn in). He's a Trump guy. Don't know when it happened, but he's the walking personification of the entire Republican Party.

TM

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520699)

It’s all Bullshit. Until the police come in and drag MEL Gibson out of the Oscars( front row?) it is all about who earns. Fuck them.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520702)

Mel has 9 lives in regard to this stuff. First was the "I'm not an ant-Semite... I'm an alcoholic." Then it was, "I'm not a racist... I have a rage problem."

My guess is, given he made like $300mil off Passion of the Christ, on top of a shit-ton of money he already had, and has since been involved with a couple of decent grossing hits, he's a silent investor in a lot of projects.

That crap Hollywood spouts about inclusion and #metoo at the Oscars and Golden Globes is obviously mostly bullshit. When those people need $$$, or someone to plug a funding hole, they'll get in bed with Mel all day long. Do a little research on fossil fuel moguls investing in Hollywood. These people cry about the environment all day long and then take checks from TX oil barons.

Mel gets a pass in Hollywood because Hollywood is nihilistic. I wouldn't be surprised if he makes the folks in whose projects he invests grovel for it. (Never get drinks or food with Hollywood sorts. T Rex arms when the check comes.)

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 520660)

I know you don't Facebook, but I think you can access this without an account: https://www.facebook.com/permalink.p...00008083698763 If you can't, let me know and I'll cut /paste in a PM for you.

This has to do with Liam Neeson thing, but I think it comes down to "how are you today?" This particular author comes down on the side of "clearly he is appalled at his past behavior and has learned something from it" with regard to Neeson. It's going to come down to a case-by-case basis, I think. With Warren, I think she's handled this entire issue badly, and so it's going to dog her for quite some time. With Northam, he fumbled right out of the gate and hasn't recovered. We'll see what happens with the AG guy. Since he's the one bringing it forward and presumably he's seen the mess Northam made, maybe he'll be able to present it better and convince the world that that isn't him anymore.

But as the piece above says, there are a shit-ton of people out there with downright racist pasts. Republicans don't seem to care as much about whether their candidates were (or are) racist/sexist/xenophobic/etc. I would have said they have a Jesus litmus test, but, well, Trump. Democrats do. But they don't know how to handle people who evolve.

I think a lot of it goes to the fact that no one deserves to be on top. NO ONE. And for each of the "oops, I wore blackface" idiots out there, there are plenty of perfectly good replacements who not once even considered it. And often they are the very people who the idiot was marginalizing/mocking/disparaging.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520667)

Nah, people love a redemption story. The second-place candidate for mayor, and a sitting state legislator, was convicted of felony burglary (at 19) and talks about his past as part of his story. Yeah, you guessed, he's a white guy.



Our immediately past mayor talked about her history of depression. But she didn't get re-elected and, yeah, white.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520704)

The problem with "who gets a pass" is that Dems seem to have a different standard for Dems then for R's, and R's do the opposite ...

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520706)

Like, how do you figure? Pretty much everyone has called on Northam to resign. Franken resigned.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520705)

no offense but I've spent time in Minneapolis lately, aren't all your city level and state level elected officials white?

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520707)

I don't agree with all of Franken's politics, but he was reasonable, and he knew how to get a point across. He is sorely missed and needed. Every time I hear his name, I'm annoyed. The only solace is that Gillibrand, the Brutus in that production, has as much chance of being elected President as she does of developing prostate cancer.

May her unrealized ambition (and she has a relentless ego) eat her alive.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520703)

Google Mel Gibson girlfriend voicemail- for him to be front and center at #metoo Oscars was obscene.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520709)

Imagine my surprised that you went full misogynist with this one.

Dude had credible allegations against him, made his own decision (and the right one), and was called out by a whole slew of his colleagues not named Gillibrand.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520707)

I don't agree with all of Franken's politics, but he was reasonable, and he knew how to get a point across. He is sorely missed and needed. Every time I hear his name, I'm annoyed. The only solace is that Gillibrand, the Brutus in that production, has as much chance of being elected President as she does of developing prostate cancer.

May her unrealized ambition (and she has a relentless ego) eat her alive.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520704)

The problem with "who gets a pass" is that Dems seem to have a different standard for Dems then for R's, and R's do the opposite (as Ty said it is political as all hell), and then mix in "why does white guy Hank get to have an opinion on Liam?" Remember someone getting hit with second hand me-too when he said that someone's #metoo thing wasn't as bad as some other guy's so he gives the less bad guy a pass? Then he was in shit for saying that (forget who it was). Then mix in do all women/black people get to set subjective standards that all have to be met? Like some black people are saying maybe the gov is net positive enough to get a pass- whereas Al Sharpton is "fuck him." It seems the Trump model of "fuck that I'm staying" is the only sure course, but a wrong one?

Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 520712)

The Kavanaugh hearings would have been disastrous for the Dems if he'd been on the judiciary committee. I really loved him as a Senator, but there were EIGHT accusations.

Originally Posted by LessinSF (Post 520701)

Unrelatedly, Hugo, Nebula and Arthur C. Clarke award winner Ann Leckie's new book Provenance uses the pronouns em, e, eir and derivatves thereof. We need credit. https://mobile.twitter.com/ann_lecki...691328?lang=en

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520704)

The problem with "who gets a pass" is that Dems seem to have a different standard for Dems then for R's, and R's do the opposite (as Ty said it is political as all hell), and then mix in "why does white guy Hank get to have an opinion on Liam?"

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520707)

I don't agree with all of Franken's politics, but he was reasonable, and he knew how to get a point across. He is sorely missed and needed. Every time I hear his name, I'm annoyed. The only solace is that Gillibrand, the Brutus in that production, has as much chance of being elected President as she does of developing prostate cancer.

May her unrealized ambition (and she has a relentless ego) eat her alive.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520706)

Like, how do you figure? Pretty much everyone has called on Northam to resign.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520708)

You're talking about elections in majority black cities.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520714)

He should have been removed from his committees as punishment. That seems fair to me.

Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 520716)

On Northam, my Twitter feed was full of Dems dumping on Northam, and conservatives dumping on Dems for defending Northam. I didn't actually see anyone defending Northam, though. This business of finding a few people on the other side of the aisle saying crazy stuff and deciding that they are typical of the whole party sometimes smacks of deciding that because a single black guy did something bad, you should just go and find any old snake.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520713)

Yeah, the Democrats eat their own alive. When a GOP legislator gets caught in blackface, or accused of groping, the Democrats scream for his head. But realizing that will go nowhere, the Democrats give up, and the guy stays.

But when the Democrats have a guy like Franken in their sights, the opportunists in the party take out a potential Presidential competitor, and the bloodthirsty sorts see a way to actually topple a politician -- something they can't do to a GOP legislator. To satisfy that urge and flex their muscles, they take out their own.

It's like beating the shit out of your own players in scrimmages while losing repeatedly to other teams.

The Democrats need to develop some sensible scale of sins and appropriate punishments. I think Northam needs to go. So does the Atty. general. I think Franken needed to be publicly censured.

I think anyone suggesting what Northam did is equivalent to what Franken did needs to get a grip.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520711)

What's misogynist there? (Except in your head?)

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520721)

I responded to adder on this, as to the separate fine points you make- Fuck you.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520718)

"because of how he handled it?" Like earlier today a sock said that, it was, ummm, oh, it was you.The easy thing is to say it's over after this shit show- the man was about to break dance at a press conference until his wife grabbed his arm. And there is at least one FB piece (I assume from a black person) sort of saying, "if we wait for perfect white people we'll be lonely." Meanwhile, my point is that has apparently used black face so many times he feels competent to give advice?

yes, but weren't there a ton of people who urged him not to? I see him as an example of "do I have to satisfy everyone's standard?" Meanwhile, no R's urged him to stick around.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520720)

The guy treated a woman as meat, because she was a dancer or posed nude or something? Just destroyed his narrative.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520725)

I'm missing where in here there is evidence of Dems having different standards for Dem conduct than for R conduct.

Originally Posted by Adder (Post 520722)

Democrats have actual principles on these subject and attempt to live by them.

They could chose to be the hypocrites that the GOP accuses them of being, but that would do very poor service to those principles.

That Gillibrand would be primarily motivated to get rid of a presidential rival is pretty funny right now, given the size of the field. It was pretty funny back then when there was little chance of Al running anyway.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520726)

He took a stupid photo in which he was not even touching her. And she alleges he tried to kiss her. Boorish? Yes. Offensive? Yes. Something that should cause an excellent Senator to lose his job? No.

Oh, and the semi-famous woman who accused him, the one in that photo? Right winger. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeann_Tweeden

She did a bunch of Hannity interviews, Greg Gutfeld's show, and worked for numerous Fox affiliates.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520718)

"because of how he handled it?" Like earlier today a sock said that, it was, ummm, oh, it was you.The easy thing is to say it's over after this shit show- the man was about to break dance at a press conference until his wife grabbed his arm. And there is at least one FB piece (I assume from a black person) sort of saying, "if we wait for perfect white people we'll be lonely." Meanwhile, my point is that has apparently used black face so many times he feels competent to give advice?

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520729)

she could have blown donkeys in the street, none of that justifies his acts- he was the champion of women's causes and he treated one like meat.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520731)

I'm not talking about the fact that she was a Playboy model. You brought that up. I'm suggesting she might be embellishing because she's a right winger taking out a Democrat.

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 520727)

You say the dem who routinely wore black face is out BECAUSE of his press conferences. You'd give an R a pass for being a regular black face user? Please.

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 520728)

Exhibiting mob frenzied behavior is not hewing to principles. It's actually the opposite. The principled person stands up to the Robespierres and says, "Hey, this feels cathartic, but is actually quite counterproductive."