Search results for query: *

Right, but you've told me you're not performing for anyone else's benefit, so I guess I'm the one you're trying to impress. Whether or not you're able to display a basic grasp of the position you're attacking has a great deal of purchase on whether or not I'm willing to discuss your objections...

Okay, so you've shifted you position back to not being able to tell the difference between the statements "The results show racist attitudes among the white participants" and "white people are racists." EDIT: Sorry, I don't want you to think I don't appreciate your efforts at playing word games...

It looks like this whole thing is pretty fucked up. Like, if there's an organization tasked with investigating corruption then none of the people potentially being investigated should probably have veto power on that organization's funding. But even if Rick Perry is guilty of corruption and is...

What is this post about? Are you upset someone's civil right to gun someone down in the street and then have no one talk about it or provide their name was violated? Because no such right exists. No one has advocated actual vigilantism in this case.

I just can't look away. I heard that Brown had been involved in a robbery and I knew there was going to be some victorious crowing about how that means he deserved to be executed for walking down the street and for some reason I just had to come and actually see it.

Well, you've succeeded in convincing me that you really, honestly, are having trouble remembers what you said and what it was in response to, so I'll play with quotes a bit for you. First, you made this post: In this post you accuse me of making a number of leaps in order to get to the...

Well, if they had hacked some kind of grand database of the law and flagged someone as a murderer and caused them to go to jail or be executed or something as a result, that'd be a fair point. That's some kind of weird science fiction scenario, though. Naming a murderer is a different thing.

Are we sure naming a murderer is only vigilantism? Maybe they should be more properly classified as terrorists.

You know what, I'll give you two examples of problems we've got here: 1) You can't be bothered to say what you mean 2) You're incapable of remembering what you've said and what it was in response to. Though to be entirely accurate, I can't be sure about the second one. Since you think it's...

Check directly under the sentence you quoted.

You've got a couple of objections there. Your first set is overcome by a large enough sample in the same way you described not controlling certain factors in the test participants being overcome by a large enough sample. The second set isn't actually an objection, it's just an explanation as...

More like, no one can maintain that attitude in a police culture that views the public as an enemy combatant.

No, because you think if someone in a wheelchair happens to bump into someone occasionally then tolerating their disability has become such an unwieldy burden on society that the person should be locked-up somewhere. But then, I don't really know if you actually think that. I do kind of...

If that's your number one rule, you should probably just find a safer job. What if we talked about other high-risk professions that way. What if a firefighter's number one priority was to make sure he goes home to his family? Look for people in a burning apartment building? Nope. Except...

There's a lot of things wrong here, but let's focus on the one we agree on: You can't be bothered to say what you mean. That's pretty insurmountable, really.

It is as if you and Derec are having a competition to say who can say the most offensive thing possible without actually violating the forum rules.

I'd be more likely to give that kind of statement serious consideration if it were coming from someone who's able to tell the difference between the statements "The research shows racist attitudes among the white participants" and "white people are racist."

No, you've complained about statements of your own imagining that you attribute the researchers. I haven't insinuated either of those things. I've pretty plainly and openly stated that your objections are based on some kind of emotional response, though. The content of your post is a...

Yeah, wow. You are absolutely responding emotionally and not rationally here, because you're criticizing a study that doesn't actually exist. The researchers did not conclude that racism an attribute of whiteness, or that being white is what causes racism, or whatever. The research shows...

Please answer this question: If you manage to answer incorrectly, I will begin taking your objections about the lack of non-white test subjects seriously.