Donald trump. what is your take on him?

[JohnRoberts]

Something like 59% of hate crime is perpetrated against jewish people.

I think that's absurd. I don't see how anyone can come to such a figure.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/tables-and-data-declarations/4tabledatadecpdf/table_4_offenses_offense_type_by_bias_motivation_2012.xls

Not even close. Roughly 10%, with most of that being less serious offenses, i.e. not "aggravated assault" or worse.

I can not find the original link I referred to, but I stand corrected.. It looks like I saw the percentage of "religious" hate crimes, not all hate crimes. 

Anti-black hate crimes trump religious hate crimes. (bad pun to bring it back on topic).

My apologies for posting a statistic with incorrect context, not my intent.

JR

 

[mattiasNYC]

Something like 59% of hate crime is perpetrated against jewish people.

I think that's absurd. I don't see how anyone can come to such a figure.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2012/tables-and-data-declarations/4tabledatadecpdf/table_4_offenses_offense_type_by_bias_motivation_2012.xls

Not even close. Roughly 10%, with most of that being less serious offenses, i.e. not "aggravated assault" or worse.

I can not find the original link I referred to, but I stand corrected.. It looks like I saw the percentage of "religious" hate crimes, not all hate crimes. 

Anti-black hate crimes trump religious hate crimes. (bad pun to bring it back on topic).

My apologies for posting a statistic with incorrect context, not my intent.

JR

I don't think anyone thought you intended it. And, to be fair, statistically speaking, you're more likely to suffer a hate crime due to being Jewish compared to being black it seems (I'd have to check again), since there are fewer Jews than black people.

Then again, the majority of those crimes are "lesser" in nature..... so as often is the case we can look at it different ways depending on what we deem important.

 

[mattiasNYC]

Being called a racist is a modern knee jerk reaction to squelch thoughtful discussion of contentious issues. (see rules for radicals.. make people defend them selves to diffuse arguments ).

JR

And so is using the [race-card]-card to avoid having to justify actual racism. This goes both ways.

Sometimes it's not about being PC, it's actually about not being a racist jerk.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Being called a racist is a modern knee jerk reaction to squelch thoughtful discussion of contentious issues. (see rules for radicals.. make people defend them selves to diffuse arguments ).

JR

And so is using the [race-card]-card to avoid having to justify actual racism. This goes both ways.

Sometimes it's not about being PC, it's actually about not being a racist jerk.

I think the PC crowd has just jumped the shark with this Oscars boycott....  blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

While "I" think they jumped the shark, just like Fonzie they probably don't realize it yet.

JR

 

[Krcwell]

Being called a racist is a modern knee jerk reaction to squelch thoughtful discussion of contentious issues. (see rules for radicals.. make people defend them selves to diffuse arguments ).

JR

And so is using the [race-card]-card to avoid having to justify actual racism. This goes both ways.

Sometimes it's not about being PC, it's actually about not being a racist jerk.

I think the PC crowd has just jumped the shark with this Oscars boycott....  blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

While "I" think they jumped the shark, just like Fonzie they probably don't realize it yet.

JR

Accusations of racism get thrown around everywhere. It's a simple 2-dimensional motivation to apply to one's percieved adversaries, it makes them hate-able and illegitimacizes any potential rationalization of their viewpoint. Like Mattias said, you find it on both sides of the spectrum.

I thought Chris Rock actually did a good job of showing the absurdity of it all. Good Oscar's opening monologue. The media wanted a race war. Chris didn't give it to 'em.

 

[lassoharp]

Here it comes . . . . .

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/iowa-hs-students-chant-trump-after-loss

Violence will eventually follow 

 

[dmp]

I think the PC crowd has just jumped the shark with this Oscars boycott....  blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

There is certainly a lot of rhetoric thrown around, but there are also solid statistics that identify problems.
For instance, studies that show identical applicants get different rates on loans because of race. Or a miriad of other statistical evidence.  There is also a motivation of those that benefit from the status quo, to dismiss claims and throw rhetoric the opposite way.

 

[dmp]

What will it do to the Republican party if Trump takes the nomination, as it now seems he will?
Can it continue or will it fracture? The Trump hangover is going to be severe.  In the moment, it seems people are in awe of his ability to assume power, but as time passes he will look more and more like a bully, entirely unqualified for a position of power (IMO).
The party has always seemed to be a uneasy alliance between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.  Prominent conservative politicians are already hedging support from Trump.
Changing demographics are taking a heavy toll. Reality has been a hard truth for Rove's "permanent Republican majority"
When strategists were saying that the Republican base needed to expand by being inclusive, Trump came in and has alienated everyone except his loyal fan club. 50% of the party (25% of the voting public) isn't  going anywhere in national elections.

Opinions vary on the solutions to the problems this country is facing - but I have some hope the country can return to a more prosperous path. 
It is a shame the Republican obstruction has been so successful in recent years. But things are improving as we rollback the failed policies of the conservative revolution.
We are feeling the pain of the 'starve the beast' policies enacted by Republicans 30 yrs ago (high debt).
The pain from the rollback of progressive taxation and the rise of corporate power (absurd wealth inequality and stagnation of wages, which has led to a sickly economy -  people don't have money to spend).
Ultimately, if the Republican party hadn't enacted policies that screwed the middle class so severely, and handed so much wealth to powerful business, there wouldn't be such a need for a larger safety net, which they abhor.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I think the PC crowd has just jumped the shark with this Oscars boycott....  blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

There is certainly a lot of rhetoric thrown around, but there are also solid statistics that identify problems.
For instance, studies that show identical applicants get different rates on loans because of race. Or a miriad of other statistical evidence.  There is also a motivation of those that benefit from the status quo, to dismiss claims and throw rhetoric the opposite way.

I've mentioned in passing before about how the CFPB has been fining large banking institutions like their personal piggy bank.  Regarding your statistical evidence it is surely against the law to use race in lending decisions. The rash of lawsuits after the housing crisis tried to characterize the bad loans on some kind of racial bias.

One contentious debate is over the use of "Disparate impact analysis" an analytical technique developed to justify employment discrimination.  Mortgage lenders have been required to collect racial data for the last few decades. No doubt collecting this data has influenced lending behavior, and that data alone does not prove discrimination.

http://www.bu.edu/rbfl/files/2013/09/ProvingRacialDiscrimination.pdf  this paper supporting use of Disparate impact analysis concedes this lack of actual proof.

Firth Third bank just paid an $18M fine for charging African americans and hispanics higher mark-ups on car loans. I can imagine a bank paying the CFPB as a cost of doing business.

I am not arguing that there is no discrimination anywhere ever, just that government can not guarantee equal outcomes, only equal opportunity.

JR

PS: Car loans will probably be the next economic shoe to drop.. Banks hold on to higher quality loans, but bundle and sell off the lower quality loans, just like the sub-prime home mortgage bundles. Car loans are not on the scale of home loans, so will not have the same impact on the overall economy, but this will be another loss item for banks (car loan defaults are rising). Banks are already struggling with their lending to oil drillers. Bad time to be a banker, low interest rates, increasing regulation, and weak growth. Regulators are still looking for some high profile bankers they can perp walk to give voters their pound of flesh. 
 

 

[JohnRoberts]

What will it do to the Republican party if Trump takes the nomination, as it now seems he will?
Can it continue or will it fracture? The Trump hangover is going to be severe.  In the moment, it seems people are in awe of his ability to assume power, but as time passes he will look more and more like a bully, entirely unqualified for a position of power (IMO).
The party has always seemed to be a uneasy alliance between fiscal conservatives and social conservatives.  Prominent conservative politicians are already hedging support from Trump.
Changing demographics are taking a heavy toll. Reality has been a hard truth for Rove's "permanent Republican majority"
When strategists were saying that the Republican base needed to expand by being inclusive, Trump came in and has alienated everyone except his loyal fan club. 50% of the party (25% of the voting public) isn't  going anywhere in national elections.

Opinions vary on the solutions to the problems this country is facing - but I have some hope the country can return to a more prosperous path. 
It is a shame the Republican obstruction has been so successful in recent years. But things are improving as we rollback the failed policies of the conservative revolution.
We are feeling the pain of the 'starve the beast' policies enacted by Republicans 30 yrs ago (high debt).
The pain from the rollback of progressive taxation and the rise of corporate power (absurd wealth inequality and stagnation of wages, which has led to a sickly economy -  people don't have money to spend).
Ultimately, if the Republican party hadn't enacted policies that screwed the middle class so severely, and handed so much wealth to powerful business, there wouldn't be such a need for a larger safety net, which they abhor.

Too many talking points to discuss calmly, that said I am not very happy with either party... that is why there is so much anger this election, all politicians suck.

FWIW I consider Trump to be very politician like (a crony capitalist).

JR

 

[Biasrocks]

My view from the country next door is that Trump is a Misogynistic,  Fascist, Sociopath.

This is bore out by his language and his actions.

His smug, no holds barred, straight talking attitude may seem refreshing now but, so did another's leaders redirect about making a certain country great again.

It won't end well.

Mark

 

[mattiasNYC]

blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

But people who blame racism for every adverse outcome are surely in a minority, and resorting this hyperbole just reinforces the notion that "PC" and "race-carding" is just an excuse for actual racism or a means to avoid having to discuss actual issues with an open mind.

 

[mattiasNYC]

Here it comes . . . . .

http://crooksandliars.com/2016/02/iowa-hs-students-chant-trump-after-loss

Violence will eventually follow 

In one sense it's funny... in the same sense that Santorum became a noun....

In the sense that he might be POTUS.... not so much....

 

[mattiasNYC]

Yes, I think every country has a hard core of racists, I don't know what the percentage is, but I would guess around 5-10%.

I think the risk is that the tone and messages risk making that group larger, as well as increasing the group of people who look the other way.

It is surely wrong to be racist, but it is also wrong to call people who object to these cultural practices racist as well.

DaveP

But the only way to know if people are objecting to cultural non-race-induced practices or race itself is to evaluate their stance on the matter, and [race-card]-carding does nothing to further that evaluation.

In Sweden, again as an example, the anti-immigration party will talk about the lack of integration and a higher rate of crime in this population, but when they think the camera is off will refer to dark skinned people as "apes". So, when they're criticized they will point to their actual immigration platform and say that anything else is irrelevant slandering using the term "racist". And in doing this they hope to avoid discussion of the real issue. And it's always "rotten apples", never an ideology.

The point I'm trying to make is that this behavior is then mirrored in the population. They feel increasingly 'allowed' to voice straight up racist views while then claiming the charge of them being racist is just "PC run amok" or something to that effect. That's what I'm seeing.

It obviously doesn't mean I don't agree that the term is woefully misapplied many times. Being anti-Islam for example is not being racist, as Islam is a religion.

 

[JohnRoberts]

blaming racism for every adverse outcome is just gratuitous over-reach.

But people who blame racism for every adverse outcome are surely in a minority, and resorting this hyperbole just reinforces the notion that "PC" and "race-carding" is just an excuse for actual racism or a means to avoid having to discuss actual issues with an open mind.

I didn't watch the oscars. Chris Rock was specifically brought in and paid well to try to diffuse the situation (he's a smart guy and his humor is smart too, not angry like some).  I suspect liberal hollyweird is pedaling as fast as they can, trying to keep their prima donnas happy.

I don't take any pleasure from watching rich actors give prizes to each other for doing a job that pays them handsomely (well above minimum wage).  Most of them have talent (and/or looks), but that is why they get paid the big bucks (probably mostly because they sell tickets).  I find it impossible to dredge up much sympathy for an extremely successful black actor claiming that he lost to a white actor because of his skin color. If you think that I'm racist for saying that you are entitled to your (incorrect) opinion. I don't hear any white athletes complaining that they don't get their fair share of sports awards. If there is one somewhere, he is being ignored as he should be.

Another argument besides the white-ness of the academy is that it's voting members are "old". I thought age and experience was supposed to bring wisdom, something desirable in a judge, not somehow disqualify them. While being old does not automatically make one wise, it doesn't make a wise man stupid (at least until the very end).

I find the whole thing petty and superficial... there are real problems in the world larger that arguing over small statues.

JR

PS: While I disagree with their rationale for why, I defend their right to boycott (an awards ceremony), free speech and all that. I wonder if they are embarrassed yet?

 

[mattiasNYC]

I didn't watch the oscars. Chris Rock was specifically brought in and paid well to try to diffuse the situation

Actually he was hired before the nominations were official, and thus before this rucus.

find it impossible to dredge up much sympathy for an extremely successful black actor claiming that he lost to a white actor because of his skin color. If you think that I'm racist for saying that you are entitled to your (incorrect) opinion. I don't hear any white athletes complaining that they don't get their fair share of sports awards. If there is one somewhere, he is being ignored as he should be.

Sports awards are typically based on quantifiable results. Apples and oranges.

Another argument besides the white-ness of the academy is that it's voting members are "old". I thought age and experience was supposed to bring wisdom, something desirable in a judge, not somehow disqualify them. While being old does not automatically make one wise, it doesn't make a wise man stupid (at least until the very end).

The context is probably white+man+old. I'm betting that if you check the statistics of what demographic is the most likely to hold racist views that'll be the one. That obviously doesn't prove that's the cause, but I'm fairly certain that was part of the reasoning.

In addition to that, it's probably also true that some feel that older people are naturally less in touch with contemporary art. I saw some study on what music people end up liking, and apparently most people stop "adding" musical genres to their "catalog" at a certain age. So no wonder we "old" guys don't understand new music, it might be partially because of a limitation of our biology (although I of course will always claim that music was better when I was young... because I'm right). So that'd be another explanation.

The one explanation that resonates with me however is that executives hand out roles according to what the bean counters say will be profitable (go Capitalism), in addition to reviewers of the Academy actually not receiving the films with actual actors of color deserving of nominations, for some odd reason.

I find the whole thing petty and superficial... there are real problems in the world larger that arguing over small statues.

Racism being one of those real problems John, along with un-equal opportunities.

PS: While I disagree with their rationale for why, I defend their right to boycott (an awards ceremony), free speech and all that. I wonder if they are embarrassed yet?

Well, one curious turn of events is that Chris Rock told a joke using Asian stereotypes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3469095/He-preaches-equality-makes-blatant-joke-Asian-kids-fixing-phone-Chris-Rock-accused-hypocrisy-racial-stereotyping-speech-OscarsSoWhite-controversy.html

So, while there were some objections to some of his jokes, the overwhelming negative criticism is from the Asian community. Personally I found the joke moderately funny, and if one goes down the road of thinking about it, "satire". However, if one wanted to perpetuate stereotypes it appears whatever ethnicity I am I am not entirely bereft of a sense of humor (Dave may disagree), whereas other ethnicities apparently are. At the very least all they see is an attempt at humor at their expense, rather than using them as an example to illustrate what is wrong and thereby actually including them in this "discussion".....

The way I see it, we're looking at something entirely binary: Either Rock espouses views coherent with the steretypes in the joke, or the joke is just ironic satire.

Either way the US is absolutely obsessed with race it seems. And I lay that blame equally among all groups.

 

[JohnRoberts]

I didn't watch the oscars. Chris Rock was specifically brought in and paid well to try to diffuse the situation

Actually he was hired before the nominations were official, and thus before this rucus.

This ruckus probably started a year ago with the MLK film not winning a few awards. (I didn't see the film so have no opinion.) but who knows... maybe longer ago if the same old racist white guys were running the academy. {/satire}

find it impossible to dredge up much sympathy for an extremely successful black actor claiming that he lost to a white actor because of his skin color. If you think that I'm racist for saying that you are entitled to your (incorrect) opinion. I don't hear any white athletes complaining that they don't get their fair share of sports awards. If there is one somewhere, he is being ignored as he should be.

Sports awards are typically based on quantifiable results. Apples and oranges.

Movies are generally measured by box office and profit which is objective, while the awards may pretend that they don't care about money, I believe they do. There does seem to be a correlation over time (I'm shocked). Will Smith's "Concussion" movie did not do well at the box office.

White athletes often admit when they get beat. While I must admit I've seen as many white players cheat as black players do at the gym. Some must think that winning pick-up games are really important (they're not). My suspicion is that they might not be winning at life so must win somewhere, anywhere. I'll give them the unimportant wins, I prefer to win off the court. 

Another argument besides the white-ness of the academy is that it's voting members are "old". I thought age and experience was supposed to bring wisdom, something desirable in a judge, not somehow disqualify them. While being old does not automatically make one wise, it doesn't make a wise man stupid (at least until the very end).

The context is probably white+man+old. I'm betting that if you check the statistics of what demographic is the most likely to hold racist views that'll be the one. That obviously doesn't prove that's the cause, but I'm fairly certain that was part of the reasoning.

huh more statistics? The most racist guys I ever experienced were some young (white) men in a bar in cambridge.  While I did meet one self admitted KKK member at a house party in GA... IIRC he was not invited back. Rev Jeremiah Wright BTW seems a little, you know... racist (to me, but I'd rather not judge others publicly until I am perfect myself. ) Stereotypes are intellectually lazy. 

In addition to that, it's probably also true that some feel that older people are naturally less in touch with contemporary art. I saw some study on what music people end up liking, and apparently most people stop "adding" musical genres to their "catalog" at a certain age. So no wonder we "old" guys don't understand new music, it might be partially because of a limitation of our biology (although I of course will always claim that music was better when I was young... because I'm right). So that'd be another explanation.

If you leave such decisions to the kids, we'd be watching Justin Beiber read the phone book. I'm getting old and I resemble that remark. I hear some decent new music on Carson Daly's program, but his trademark affectation to not look into the camera is annoying.  I haven't bought a CD or listened to live music in over a year... While I know some friends who are plying live tonight, 25 + miles each way... drinking crappy beer in a smoke filled bar, just to hear covers, not gonna happen.  The last local band playing original music left the area last century (used to be my party house band).

The one explanation that resonates with me however is that executives hand out roles according to what the bean counters say will be profitable (go Capitalism), in addition to reviewers of the Academy actually not receiving the films with actual actors of color deserving of nominations, for some odd reason.

uh-oh another conspiracy...  again I can't give a sh__.

I find the whole thing petty and superficial... there are real problems in the world larger that arguing over small statues.

Racism being one of those real problems John, along with un-equal opportunities.

I consider the thousands of black kids killed in Chicago more important that Will Smith's trophy shelf.

PS: While I disagree with their rationale for why, I defend their right to boycott (an awards ceremony), free speech and all that. I wonder if they are embarrassed yet?

Well, one curious turn of events is that Chris Rock told a joke using Asian stereotypes.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3469095/He-preaches-equality-makes-blatant-joke-Asian-kids-fixing-phone-Chris-Rock-accused-hypocrisy-racial-stereotyping-speech-OscarsSoWhite-controversy.html

So, while there were some objections to some of his jokes, the overwhelming negative criticism is from the Asian community. Personally I found the joke moderately funny, and if one goes down the road of thinking about it, "satire". However, if one wanted to perpetuate stereotypes it appears whatever ethnicity I am I am not entirely bereft of a sense of humor (Dave may disagree), whereas other ethnicities apparently are. At the very least all they see is an attempt at humor at their expense, rather than using them as an example to illustrate what is wrong and thereby actually including them in this "discussion".....

The way I see it, we're looking at something entirely binary: Either Rock espouses views coherent with the steretypes in the joke, or the joke is just ironic satire.

I choose not to take his monologue literally or seriously (I didn't even watch it). I have heard a few criticisms. Another was the young, just sworn in, cop killed on saturday making some police supporters sensitive to his "cops shooting black people" joke. Humor is rarely funny to everybody. I believe his intent was good..

I keep trying to tell my friends on face book that partisan humor is only funny to half the audience. I block more of my conservative friends posts, than my liberal friends posts (probably because i have more conservative friends and I've already blocked so many liberal/progressive web sites). I'm an equal opportunity blocker.  8)

Either way the US is absolutely obsessed with race it seems. And I lay that blame equally among all groups.

The US is obsessed with celebrity (as evidenced by trump's success)... race enmity IMO is being ginned up for personal and political gain. So perhaps politicians are obsessed with race, at least some are. 

While I understand that opinions vary...

JR

 

[mattiasNYC]

Movies are generally measured by box office and profit which is objective, while the awards may pretend that they don't care about money, I believe they do. There does seem to be a correlation over time (I'm shocked). Will Smith's "Concussion" movie did not do well at the box office.

I think you're wrong about that. Looking on Wikipedia's page for 2015 box office numbers the only films that got an award from that list was Spectre, for best original song, and then Mad Max. Star Wars didn't get anything despite being insanely successful.

huh more statistics? The most racist guys I ever experienced were some young (white) men in a bar in cambridge.  While I did meet one self admitted KKK member at a house party in GA... IIRC he was not invited back. Rev Jeremiah Wright BTW seems a little, you know... racist (to me, but I'd rather not judge others publicly until I am perfect myself. ) Stereotypes are intellectually lazy. 

Yeah, they are lazy. But every statistic I've ever seen on the topic says that younger people tend - on average - to be less racist and conservative.

But you're absolutely right in that it could be that taken as a whole it won't work out the way I claimed. It could be that women are worse, and that black people are worse. Come to think of it, it actually wouldn't surprise me one bit. Either way, I think the argument, right or wrong, was inferring that connection of those three parameters; white/male/older.

If you leave such decisions to the kids, we'd be watching Justin Beiber read the phone book. I'm getting old and I resemble that remark. I hear some decent new music on Carson Daly's program, but his trademark affectation to not look into the camera is annoying.  I haven't bought a CD or listened to live music in over a year... While I know some friends who are plying live tonight, 25 + miles each way... drinking crappy beer in a smoke filled bar, just to hear covers, not gonna happen.  The last local band playing original music left the area last century (used to be my party house band).

I agree, but it doesn't have to be either or. It would make sense to have a jury that represents a wider range. Unless of course the members possess some sort of unique traits that are more prevalent within their demographic, which I very much doubt. At the end of the day the truth is that non-whites will soon be a majority, and from a purely financial standpoint it will no longer make sense to not have a more diverse roster of nominees.

The one explanation that resonates with me however is that executives hand out roles according to what the bean counters say will be profitable (go Capitalism), in addition to reviewers of the Academy actually not receiving the films with actual actors of color deserving of nominations, for some odd reason.

uh-oh another conspiracy...  again I can't give a sh__.
[/quote]

That actually comes from people within the academy who I know. They actually say they're not receiving as much material as they 'should' from the distributors/producers, despite the material existing. It's no conspiracy.

And I find it hard to believe you care so little about this yet write so much. You must be tremendously bored right now.

I find the whole thing petty and superficial... there are real problems in the world larger that arguing over small statues.

Racism being one of those real problems John, along with un-equal opportunities.

I consider the thousands of black kids killed in Chicago more important that Will Smith's trophy shelf.
[/quote]

It's not about the trophy, but you knew that, didn't you?

I choose not to take his monologue literally or seriously (I didn't even watch it). I have heard a few criticisms. Another was the young, just sworn in, cop killed on saturday making some police supporters sensitive to his "cops shooting black people" joke. Humor is rarely funny to everybody. I believe his intent was good..

The monologue was boring I thought. I find race-jokes pretty boring by now. Heard'em all. Moderately funny stuff.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Movies are generally measured by box office and profit which is objective, while the awards may pretend that they don't care about money, I believe they do. There does seem to be a correlation over time (I'm shocked). Will Smith's "Concussion" movie did not do well at the box office.

I think you're wrong about that. Looking on Wikipedia's page for 2015 box office numbers the only films that got an award from that list was Spectre, for best original song, and then Mad Max. Star Wars didn't get anything despite being insanely successful.

Yes, not completely objective, Hollyweird has their own brand of politics where too much success is considered un-cool, except when negotiating pay scale. Too much box office failure has negative career consequences.

huh more statistics? The most racist guys I ever experienced were some young (white) men in a bar in cambridge.  While I did meet one self admitted KKK member at a house party in GA... IIRC he was not invited back. Rev Jeremiah Wright BTW seems a little, you know... racist (to me, but I'd rather not judge others publicly until I am perfect myself. ) Stereotypes are intellectually lazy. 

Yeah, they are lazy. But every statistic I've ever seen on the topic says that younger people tend - on average - to be less racist and conservative.

do you mean less racist and "less" conservative..?

I've met some (white) neighbor kids who didn't drop far from the proverbial tree (their parent's belief system). In general the (white) kids I met attending private schools are less liberal/progressive than kids in public schools which I attribute to desegregation exposing public school system kids to other races as individuals not stereotypes. FWIW I met some (black) kids at the gym that didn't know what to make of me. I suspect they were likewise not exposed to many old white people. They started out calling me sir, thinking that I would like that (I don't), but it's probably not a bad idea when meeting strangers. I often call strangers sir or maam. Over time I was accepted by the kids as just another ball player (albeit older, slower, and whiter, but with a good outside shot).  Some of the black adults I played ball with would reject my every political argument, but strangely would hang on every word of my stock market or financial advice.  8)

But you're absolutely right in that it could be that taken as a whole it won't work out the way I claimed. It could be that women are worse, and that black people are worse. Come to think of it, it actually wouldn't surprise me one bit. Either way, I think the argument, right or wrong, was inferring that connection of those three parameters; white/male/older.

If you leave such decisions to the kids, we'd be watching Justin Beiber read the phone book. I'm getting old and I resemble that remark. I hear some decent new music on Carson Daly's program, but his trademark affectation to not look into the camera is annoying.  I haven't bought a CD or listened to live music in over a year... While I know some friends who are plying live tonight, 25 + miles each way... drinking crappy beer in a smoke filled bar, just to hear covers, not gonna happen.  The last local band playing original music left the area last century (used to be my party house band).

I agree, but it doesn't have to be either or. It would make sense to have a jury that represents a wider range. Unless of course the members possess some sort of unique traits that are more prevalent within their demographic, which I very much doubt. At the end of the day the truth is that non-whites will soon be a majority, and from a purely financial standpoint it will no longer make sense to not have a more diverse roster of nominees.

It still doesn't matter... It's friggin movies..!

vote by buying tickets, or not, the ultimate free market solution.

The one explanation that resonates with me however is that executives hand out roles according to what the bean counters say will be profitable (go Capitalism), in addition to reviewers of the Academy actually not receiving the films with actual actors of color deserving of nominations, for some odd reason.

uh-oh another conspiracy...  again I can't give a sh__.

That actually comes from people within the academy who I know. They actually say they're not receiving as much material as they 'should' from the distributors/producers, despite the material existing. It's no conspiracy.

And I find it hard to believe you care so little about this yet write so much. You must be tremendously bored right now.

Not bored and if I did want to argue more, I'd respond to every sundry drive by-bomb.

I find the whole thing petty and superficial... there are real problems in the world larger that arguing over small statues.

Racism being one of those real problems John, along with un-equal opportunities.

I consider the thousands of black kids killed in Chicago more important that Will Smith's trophy shelf.

It's not about the trophy, but you knew that, didn't you?

I like several of his older movies, but I object to celebrities pontificating on subjects just because of their celebrity and wealth. Will and his wife have a family foundation that apparently is doing some good work,,, I applaud him for that, but not for attacking the academy that seems a little self serving (even if they deserve it).  I consider his work with poor kids in Africa far more important.

[edit] allow me to point out the irony (before someone else does) as I pontificate here....   [/edit]

I choose not to take his monologue literally or seriously (I didn't even watch it). I have heard a few criticisms. Another was the young, just sworn in, cop killed on saturday making some police supporters sensitive to his "cops shooting black people" joke. Humor is rarely funny to everybody. I believe his intent was good..

The monologue was boring I thought. I find race-jokes pretty boring by now. Heard'em all. Moderately funny stuff.

Satire has long been used as a medium for political or social criticism. I suspect Rock was trying to skewer some self important celebrities at least in general, but I wouldn't expect him to get too personal or too real in front of that crowd.

JR

 

[DaveP]

I often call strangers sir or maam.

In France we always call everyone Monsieur or Madame, they are a very polite race.  They even say Bonjour to everyone at large when entering a Doctor's waiting room, it quite threw us at first ???

I'm still waiting for JR to call me Sir in that smooth southern style they have down there, but I might have a long wait.
That was a joke Matt

DaveP