Kamala Harris' "blackness" is questioned

The Dark King said:
What's strange is these guys are older the status quo works against them
Click to expand...
What's considered the world's "risk free" investment? Or as risk free as it gets. And how did that come about?
You studied finance so if you can't be intellectually honest enough to answer that then no point in continuing this discussion.
Madeleine said:
Aren’t those „big ideas“?
Click to expand...
Those are necessities that were already being worked on but we went two steps backwards when 45 won and he won because people want to change everything instead of finishing what they started.

If you read about AOC's green deal she literally wants to change everything. What she's trying to do is obviously not necessary.
 
thefieryphoenix said:
As an unconventional black man, I have never liked it when black people got up and said that other black people were not black enough. One of the things that makes me proud to be a black man is our diversity. We are black radicals, black conservatives, black moderates, black blerds, black introverts, black extroverts, black Buddhists, black Muslims, black Pentecostals, black Baptists, black Methodists, black Catholics, black Jehovah's Witnesses, black wiccans, black LGBTQIA, black intelligentsia, black janitors, black CEOs, black teachers, black truck drivers, black government officials, and black construction workers. We are light skinned, dark skinned, chocolate skinned, fair skinned, black Democrats, black Republicans, black Greens, black Libertarians, black socialists, black communists, and black constitutionalists. We are African American, afro-Caribbean, afro-Latino, blasian, and other ethnic mixes.

Willie Lynch, who advised slave owners to pit light skinned blacks against dark skinned blacks, would smirk his ugly head off today. We black people are better than this.
Saying that someone is not black enough is the ultimate form of self-hatred. It's so disgusting I would not even say it about black Republicans.
Click to expand...

Agreed, and agreed! I've seen it so much both growing up and in adult life. It seems that anytime you had a group of black people... if one was different (from the group) in some way... They were made fun of, put down, blackness questioned and so on. So it's like we as a group still need to learn to be accepting of diversity amongst us. It gnaws at me because in my mind... We already have enough obstacles to navigate in life, and to perpetuate this hate from within does none of us any good.

Coming full circle... If someone doesn't like Kamala Harris' record as a prosecutor, views etc... Fair enough, but we shouldn't be resorting to BS like level of blackness.

On another hand... I can understand it to a certain extent like when some blacks seem to become self-hating. I think Clarence Thomas is a prime example of this.
 
Last edited:
Madeleine said:
Maintaining status quo, I guess. Administrative government. Not that I campaign for that.
Click to expand...
Ideally when there are no more problems for the government to fix. Yes. It's ok for someone to say the government is doing great right now, I'm gonna sit down and chill until a change is actually needed.

I know plenty of people that would gladly take a 400,000 salary just to be there in case something happened, until then enjoy the ride.
 
thefieryphoenix said:
As an unconventional black man, I have never liked it when black people got up and said that other black people were not black enough. One of the things that makes me proud to be a black man is our diversity. We are black radicals, black conservatives, black moderates, black blerds, black introverts, black extroverts, black Buddhists, black Muslims, black Pentecostals, black Baptists, black Methodists, black Catholics, black Jehovah's Witnesses, black wiccans, black LGBTQIA, black intelligentsia, black janitors, black CEOs, black teachers, black truck drivers, black government officials, and black construction workers. We are light skinned, dark skinned, chocolate skinned, fair skinned, black Democrats, black Republicans, black Greens, black Libertarians, black socialists, black communists, and black constitutionalists. We are African American, afro-Caribbean, afro-Latino, blasian, and other ethnic mixes.

Willie Lynch, who advised slave owners to pit light skinned blacks against dark skinned blacks, would smirk his ugly head off today. We black people are better than this.
Saying that someone is not black enough is the ultimate form of self-hatred. It's so disgusting I would not even say it about black Republicans.
Click to expand...
The willie Lynch letter is a hoax. Not to negate the atrocities, but willie isn’t real.
 
Beasty said:
What's considered the world's "risk free" investment? Or as risk free as it gets. And how did that come about?
You studied finance so if you can't be intellectually honest enough to answer that then no point in continuing this discussion.

Those are necessities that were already being worked on but we went two steps backwards when 45 won and he won because people want to change everything instead of finishing what they started.

If you read about AOC's green deal she literally wants to change everything. What she's trying to do is obviously not necessary.
Click to expand...
No investment is risk free but I'm thinking in terms of ROI don't get me wrong I recognize the upfront costs may be hefty but what irks me is we NEVER have this energy when we talk defense spending or tax cuts for the rich. Some how that all makes sense but not investing in the health and education of the American people
 
The Dark King said:
No investment is risk free but I'm thinking in terms of ROI don't get me wrong I recognize the upfront costs may be hefty but what irks me is we NEVER have this energy when we talk defense spending or tax cuts for the rich. Some how that all makes sense but not investing in the health and education of the American people
Click to expand...
I did say as risk free as it gets. Now what's your response? I'm asking simple basic shit.
 
Beasty said:
I did say as risk free as it gets. Now what's your response? I'm asking simple basic shit.
Click to expand...
Well whats our scope. Its a matter of long term vs short term. We could do a budget where we cut all non essentials for the next two years and shrink the deficit but we lose so much in the long term. Its like not having healthcare for two cares. Sure you save two years of insurance payment but you develop an even more expensive preventable disease because you didn't want to pay for insurance.
 
The Dark King said:
Well whats our scope. Its a matter of long term vs short term. We could do a budget where we cut all non essentials for the next two years and shrink the deficit but we lose so much in the long term. Its like not having healthcare for two cares. Sure you save two years of insurance payment but you develop an even more expensive preventable disease because you didn't want to pay for insurance.
Click to expand...
Drop politics we're talking finance until you answer my simple question.

I'm asking you something you can't forget. Just like I can't forget pi is 3.14....

I'm asking you something that the whole principle of finance is based on.

Which investment available carries the lowest risk??
 
Beasty said:
Drop politics we're talking finance until you answer my simple question.

I'm asking you something you can't forget. Just like I can't forget pi is 3.14....

I'm asking you something that the whole principle of finance is based on.

Which investment available carries the lowest risk??
Click to expand...
Look I hear you but the objective is totally different. Investment as it applies to capital is for profit government is for people. You have to include politics both serve totally different functions.
 
The Dark King said:
Look I hear you but the objective is totally different. Investment as it applies to capital is for profit government is for people. You have to include politics both serve totally different functions.
Click to expand...
That's not what I'm asking you. Answer the question or drop it.

No economy runs on dreams. A bankrupt government is fucked irrespective of politics.

Jets take fuel, electronics take electricity. Our economy doesn't run on your political leanings.

The economy can be modeled by differential equations. No where does dreams get factored.

Facts figures and principles only.

That's why I don't fuck with politics, people can't stop for one second and agree that the sky is blue and beyond it is black space.
 
Beasty said:
Ideally when there are no more problems for the government to fix. Yes. It's ok for someone to say the government is doing great right now, I'm gonna sit down and chill until a change is actually needed.

I know plenty of people that would gladly take a 400,000 salary just to be there in case something happened, until then enjoy the ride.
Click to expand...
Who wouldn’t take a 400.000 $ Job. But how do you define doing great?

Working on climate change, social security and health insurance are three big projects. I’d congratulate anyone who’d be able to sort out those three in one term.

Anyone who is coming just to administrate has no business being a president. He can be a civil servant. If you are going to be the executive you have to have some vision for what you want to execute. It doesn’t mean you gonna invent the wheel again, but at least there should be some key policies the president is going to work on.
Stability of government means sticking to International contracts, conventions, deals that the predecessor has made EVEN if they aren’t technically legally binding. It also means maintaining your long standing alliances. Of course sticking to the rule of law and written and unwritten conventions of the country. Anything else is up for discussion.
We don’t live in a perfect world where we are ever going to reach a standard we just have to maintain because it’s so perfect and beautiful. There are always new challenges and changing circumstances to address.
I think you are trying to look at this thing through the lenses of science. You see black and white. Politics isn’t black/white, it’s 50 shades of gray.
 
Last edited:
Madeleine said:
Who wouldn’t take a 400.000 $ Job. But how do you define doing great?

Working on climate change, social security and health insurance are three big projects. I’d congratulate anyone who’d be able to sort out those three in one term.

Anyone who is coming just to administrate has no business being a president. He can be a civil servant. If you are going to be the executive you have to have some vision for what you want to execute. It doesn’t mean you gonna invent the wheel again, but at least there should be some key policies the president is going to work on.
Stability of government means sticking to International contracts, conventions, deals that the predecessor has made EVEN if they aren’t technically legally binding. It also means maintaining your long standing alliances. Of course sticking to the rule of law and written and unwritten conventions of the country. Anything else is up for discussion.
We don’t live in a perfect world where we are ever going to reach a standard we just have to maintain because it’s so perfect and beautiful. There are always new challenges and changing circumstances to address.
I think you are trying to look at this thing through the lenses of science. You see black and white. Politics isn’t black/white, it’s 50 shades of gray.
Click to expand...
We can't get anything done because we completely change directions every 8 years. If that stops then we can get to a point where all the government is doing is keeping agreements. That falls under administration.

Issues like global warming may need additional maintenance for the foreseeable future. That's ok. It's stable when we create policies to build on what we were already working.

It's unstable when we say "now that we have aknowledged global warming let's move on to free college." Then the other party comes along to reverse what we started with global warming.

It's ok that more problems may keep happening, but it shouldn't be the same issues being started from the beginning.



Understanding that the idea is to actually finish what you started so you can focus on new issues is the healthy approach. What we shouldn't do is say "well since there will always be problems let's just be happy with organized chaos."

Best example I can give is that if you are a maintenance engineer you don't change the schematics until you discover a flaw in them. If you are a design engineer your job is centered around big ideas, so you look for ways to change the schematics.

All I'm saying is we need politicians to have the maintenance engineer mentality. Save the big ideas for industries that need them.
 
Beasty said:
We can't get anything done because we completely change directions every 8 years. If that stops then we can get to a point where all the government is doing is keeping agreements. That falls under administration.

Issues like global warming may need additional maintenance for the foreseeable future. That's ok. It's stable when we create policies to build on what we were already working.

It's unstable when we say "now that we have aknowledged global warming let's move on to free college." Then the other party comes along to reverse what we started with global warming.

It's ok that more problems may keep happening, but it shouldn't be the same issues being started from the beginning.



Understanding that the idea is to actually finish what you started so you can focus on new issues is the healthy approach. What we shouldn't do is say "well since there will always be problems let's just be happy with organized chaos."

Best example I can give is that if you are a maintenance engineer you don't change the schematics until you discover a flaw in them. If you are a design engineer your job is centered around big ideas, so you look for ways to change the schematics.

All I'm saying is we need politicians to have the maintenance engineer mentality. Save the big ideas for industries that need them.
Click to expand...
My humble opinion from the outside is that this two party system creates a lot of division. Two completely opposing directions. The country is either being pulled in one or the other. I think a multi/party system with a broader political spectrum and more potential to compromise is better. Nothing to do about it so good luck to you guys on that.
Secondly I didn’t mean all that should be happening is keeping contracts etc. I meant that that’s the bare minimum that should be happening to maintain stability, on top of that we need policy- making and governing because administrating is not enough. I said that because the current one feels like he can kick any international deal ever made if he wants.
Thirdly, I think I still don’t get what a big idea is to you.
 
Madeleine said:
My humble opinion from the outside is that this two party system creates a lot of division. Two completely opposing directions. The country is either being pulled in one or the other. I think a multi/party system with a broader political spectrum and more potential to compromise is better. Nothing to do about it so good luck to you guys on that.
Secondly I didn’t mean all that should be happening is keeping contracts etc. I meant that that’s the bare minimum that should be happening to maintain stability, on top of that we need policy- making and governing because administrating is not enough. I said that because the current one feels like he can kick any international deal ever made if he wants.
Thirdly, I think I still don’t get what a big idea is to you.
Click to expand...
Administration isn't enough now, but it could get to a point that it actually is for a period of time, but the only reason it won't be is because people like to create issues They like drama and don't understand that it should be separate from government, thats why 45 is the second entertainer elected to the highest office.

A quote "90 percent of man's problems stem from his inability to sit it a quiet room alone." Theoretically if there are no issues that's what should be happening often. Not showcasing arguments 24/7. This guy goes a step further and puts it on Twitter.

A big idea is an idea that changes operations outside of necessity. I'll go even further and say any change that doesn't solve a problem is counter productive for government.

The best quote from a fictional movie is still when agent Smith said " the first matrix was perfect but it failed because people rejected it. They rejected it because humans define themselves through misery. Therefore we came up with this version." Not word for word but same idea.

If we actually evolved at a faster rate, during peace time, being president should be an easy job, but it won't get to that point in our lifetime.
 
Beasty said:
We can't get anything done because we completely change directions every 8 years. If that stops then we can get to a point where all the government is doing is keeping agreements. That falls under administration.

Issues like global warming may need additional maintenance for the foreseeable future. That's ok. It's stable when we create policies to build on what we were already working.

It's unstable when we say "now that we have aknowledged global warming let's move on to free college." Then the other party comes along to reverse what we started with global warming.

It's ok that more problems may keep happening, but it shouldn't be the same issues being started from the beginning.



Understanding that the idea is to actually finish what you started so you can focus on new issues is the healthy approach. What we shouldn't do is say "well since there will always be problems let's just be happy with organized chaos."

Best example I can give is that if you are a maintenance engineer you don't change the schematics until you discover a flaw in them. If you are a design engineer your job is centered around big ideas, so you look for ways to change the schematics.

All I'm saying is we need politicians to have the maintenance engineer mentality. Save the big ideas for industries that need them.
Click to expand...
Preach to the unicorn fairy dust Bernie-Bot

Too lazy to post an "applause" gif, but it's the thought that counts
 
RicardoCooper said:
Preach to the unicorn fairy dust Bernie-Bot

Too lazy to post an "applause" gif, but it's the thought that counts
Click to expand...
By the logic you guys are married to we wouldn't have social security just let the elderly die its cheaper. Medicare and Medicaid fuck the poor if they can't afford care that's their problem.
Slavery should not be something the government gets involved in that's private industry. All of that shit was costly but had a great ROI
 
The Dark King said:
By the logic you guys are married to we wouldn't have social security just let the elderly die its cheaper. Medicare and Medicaid fuck the poor if they can't afford care that's their problem.
Slavery should not be something the government gets involved in that's private industry. All of that shit was costly but had a great ROI
Click to expand...

250px-Hotair.jpg


hot-air-balloon-day2.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom