What does it take?

[John Koerner]

We know that Obama is a gifted speaker. As I said, he provides a smorgasbord of opinions in the same speech. The first part was meant to placate the police as not to boo him on stage or turn their backs on him during the speech (as NY cops did when De Blasio delivered a similar speech). And then he goes proceeds with  his, and the left's, favorite talking points.

The third paragraph you quoted, Matt ("But we know...") is particularly vile and dangerous. There was no place for it in the same speech and for the same occasion. Claiming that "the bias remains," that there is "racism," "discrimination," "institutional racism," "police racism" is a dangerous, vile accusation, far from the truth. It, however, provides ammunition (pardon the ominous pun) for the blacks at al to perpetuate their sense of victimhood, and provides justification for their "fight" against the police and the "system."

Ok well I disagree. But now we do have something concrete to disagree on.

Is Obama a "gifted speaker" ... or just another talking head with a puppeteer's hand up his @$$

https://www.facebook.com/donaldtrumppresident/videos/606879372808623/?pnref=story

Quite frankly, I think Obama's presentation of the same "hand-crafted speech" sucked compared to both Deval Patrick's and John Edward's  rendition of the same sheeyat.

[marvpelkey]

Recently watched a news report about the current Republican Convention. Apparently the area surrounding the Convention building/grounds is an open-carry zone but tennis balls are one of the items which are forbidden. It would actually be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Marv

[Tim Lookingbill]

1.  Agreement doesn't only mean identical thinking on everything (in which case I'd agree with your view - there wouldn't even be need to write); it can also stretch to interchanging ideas, and opinions, with agreeable people which some few here turn out not to be.

2.  I refer, of course, to the relationships online, here on LuLa: there are those I think of as interesting and with whom I'd be perfectly happy to spend time; others whose opinions are valuable on things technical; some few whose photography inspires a lot of respect and that, of itself, predisposes my feelings towards them; there are yet others I wouldn't want to meet anywhere.

3.  I have said pretty much the same thing about groups sitting around in restauarants, heads bowed to the cellphone god at the cost of the physical possibilites beside them. Of course, it might be that the real people are not actually ever connecting, and certainly not as interesting as the virtual ones...

But ironically, is what they do any more absurd than conversing on Lula?

Best not go there too deply!

Rob

Rob, I agree with everything you said. I guess the only good disagreement is when it brings new information. When it just repeats or points out the obvious then it becomes boring as well.

I just found out that the Pokeman Go craze sweeping the country evident from more people out and about in my town more than usual are using that game app to get them out of the house and exercising. A TV news story yesterday had a volunteer Pokeman Go support service group in my local park providing water bottles and aid to the players because they are so focused on the game some are injuring them self.

It's just getting really weird.

[tom b]

"Approximately 1.4 million people have been killed by firearms in the U.S. between 1968 and 2011."

I despair, what does it take to stop this ridiculous concept that having more guns stops gun deaths!

I despair that felons, mentally ill people can get guns in the US without background checks or gun control, shame on American legislators.

I despair that US citizens seem superior when they create such mayhem in the world that over one million people have died in Iraq.

Mass shootings in the US are so embarrassing that Google has given up. Stop killing each other.

As I have pointed out, under gun control there hasn't been a mass shooting in Australia since Port Arthur.

What does it take?

Stop mass murders

Stop gun deaths

Stop stupid foreign policy (one million deaths is stupid foreign policy)

Don't put guns in the hands of criminals and mentally challenged people.

You get the picture!

Please don't elect Donald Trump!

[Rob C]

Tom you're going to have to accept it: nothing's going to change on that score.

It is how it is, and it's way too late. In fact, as much as I hate the idea of armed civilians, were I living in the States and allowed to do so, I would also have a pistol as close by as I could. There's no glory in being the weakest in the pack. No glory and no common sense. In fact, I often wish that I had something at home with which to protect myself. In winter, I'm the only guy in my block. I am in no physical condition (or position) to play Kung Fu with anybody wishing to help himself to whatever I have at home.

The 'home is sacred' concept makes perfect sense: break in and expect to pay the price - the choice is yours to make; I'd rather you didn't force it upon me, but if you do... sadly, I'm not allowed the opportunity of holding the dominant hand.

It's never a simple choice, I guess, and you have to apply the rules as they are where you are.

Frankly, I think that the chance of banning guns in America is as great as seriously cutting state hand-outs in Britain. No political will for it, only rhetoric. You're better off making more photographs than worrying about it. I'd take my own advice, but as I realise that pretty much anything other than photography of people is ultimately meaningless for me, I have sort of decided to stop wasting even more time in front of the computer making beautiful, pointless images that have no future.

Rob

[tom b]

"Tom you're going to have to accept it: nothing's going to change on that score."

Hey Rob you are right. In the American psyche guns protect you. Unfortunately they also make it much easier to commit crimes and kill (often and with great ease, even school children can do it).

There were 214 gun deaths in Australia in 2014. Adjusting for population it's the equivalent of 3200 in the US. In the US there were 33,599 gun deaths in 2014 (that is 30,000 more deaths). Unfortunately that probably meant just under 20,000 gun suicides. Yep, guns can't protect you from yourself.

Look, I understand that Americans love their guns. It is totally stupid but that's their constitutional right. God help them.

Cheers,

[pegelli]

Yes your conclusion is yours.  The answer as to whether more Americans agree with me or you will be answered in November.  I believe (and the polls seem to be agreeing) that the majority of Americans would rather elect a very flawed man like Donald Trump as president than allow the leftists to pander to violence and anarchy.  We'll know in less than four months.

Yes, if you follow the advice given in this thread to "read between the lines" it suddenly becomes opinion and not fact. That's fine, everybody is entitled to their opinion.

We'll see who gets elected in November and I never said it wouldn't be Trump, I just implied that your statements on Obama were your opinion and not based on direct quotes and facts. If you just take pieces and sound bites from these articles you can spin a very negative as well as a very positive message, based on what you choose and how you rip it out of its context.

Btw, I find it amazing that the republican party keeps bashing and blaming others rather then come forward with their own program (other then bringing more Christian bibles in the US education program). The only thing holding them together is the hate of Hillary and while it may work I see some similarities with Germany in 1930, when they got a similar election rhetoric (and successful result) that they deeply regretted in 1945.

[Rand47]

"Tom you're going to have to accept it: nothing's going to change on that score."

Hey Rob you are right. In the American psyche guns protect you. Unfortunately they also make it much easier to commit crimes and kill (often and with great ease, even school children can do it).

There were 214 gun deaths in Australia in 2014. Adjusting for population it's the equivalent of 3200 in the US. In the US there were 33,599 gun deaths in 2014 (that is 30,000 more deaths). Unfortunately that probably meant just under 20,000 gun suicides. Yep, guns can't protect you from yourself.

Look, I understand that Americans love their guns. It is totally stupid but that's their constitutional right. God help them.

Cheers,

Tom,

"In 2014, there were 2,160 males (18.4 per 100,000) and 704 females (5.9 per 100,000) that died by suicide, a total of 2,864 deaths (12.0 per 100,000), which equates to an average of 7.8 deaths by suicide in Australia each day."

In the US: 
The annual age-adjusted suicide rate is 12.93 per 100,000 individuals

Looks like we both kill ourselves at pretty much the same rate.  Since many of the US deaths are by firearm, what happens if you pull this statistic from your thinking about guns / gun deaths?  Do you think Americans wouldn't kill themselves if they didn't have guns?  Doesn't seem to work that way in your country.  And, I'm not being insensitive to the issue of suicide, too many of my friends in the fire service have gone that route after retirment for me to be callous.

Rand

[Robert Roaldi]

A report about another police officer who feared for his life because of a dangerous African-American: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/miami-police-shooting-hands-up_us_57903472e4b0bdddc4d32ad3?ir=Canada&section=ca_canada&utm_hp_ref=canada

At what point does a series of isolated incidents became a pattern?

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...At what point does a series of isolated incidents became a pattern?

Every time someone wants to spin it so.

[Rob C]

A report about another police officer who feared for his life because of a dangerous African-American: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/miami-police-shooting-hands-up_us_57903472e4b0bdddc4d32ad3?ir=Canada&section=ca_canada&utm_hp_ref=canada

At what point does a series of isolated incidents became a pattern?

I don't know about a pattern, but I do think that it says something about the sort of person who opts to join the police.

In my mind, it's a very dangerous job, and by definition demands a mindset/personality that can handle stress and rapidly developing situations. I should imagine that people able to meet those requirements do not grow on trees. However, there is an obvious need to fill uniforms and get them out into the world. Maybe that's the glitch: comes a point where you have to drop the standards you'd set simply to meet the numbers. Strikes me that there are quite a few such square pegs being slipped into round holes. Make the hole big enough and no problem...

Sure ain't a job I could have ever handled.

Rob

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

...statements on Obama were your opinion and not based on direct quotes...

Pieter, where would the world of arts, literature, psychology, etc. be if we would only rely on the literal meaning?

[pegelli]

Pieter, where would the world of arts, literature, psychology, etc. be if we would only rely on the literal meaning?

That's not the point Slobodan. As soon as there is interpretation it becomes an opinion. Nothing wrong with that but let's call it what it is and not confuse it with facts.

It's a fact Mrs. Trump copied a speech from Mrs. Obama, it's an opinion when you say that's good or bad.
It's a fact Mrs. Trump lied when she said she wrote it all by herself, it's an opinion if you think that's good or bad.
It's a fact Mrs. Clinton lied about aspects of the e-mail traffic of her job as Secretary of State, it's an opinion if you believe that disqualifies her as next president of the US.
It's a fact that diplomas from the Trump University are a total fake, it's an opinion if you believe that disqualifies Mr. Trump as next president of the US or not.
....
....
....

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

... It's a fact Mrs. Trump lied when she said she wrote it all by herself...

It is not a fact, it is a lie (what you said above).

Since you like direct quotes, here it is: “I wrote it with as little help as possible,” which definitely isn' the same as "all by herself." And that's a fact. 

[pegelli]

It is not a fact, it is a lie (what you said above).

Let's call it a mistake

Any mistakes in the other three?

[Otto Phocus]

Mass shootings in the US are so embarrassing that Google has given up.

Not sure I understand what you mean by this.

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Let's call it a mistake

Any mistakes in the other three?

I actually agree with you (on the distinction between facts and opinions):

[Rand47]

That's not the point Slobodan. As soon as there is interpretation it becomes an opinion. Nothing wrong with that but let's call it what it is and not confuse it with facts.

It's a fact Mrs. Trump copied a speech from Mrs. Obama, it's an opinion when you say that's good or bad.
It's a fact Mrs. Trump lied when she said she wrote it all by herself, it's an opinion if you think that's good or bad.
It's a fact Mrs. Clinton lied about aspects of the e-mail traffic of her job as Secretary of State, it's an opinion if you believe that disqualifies her as next president of the US.
It's a fact that diplomas from the Trump University are a total fake, it's an opinion if you believe that disqualifies Mr. Trump as next president of the US or not.
....
....
....

What I find amazing about this whole tempest in a teapot re the supposed plagiarism is that the words, phrases, sentiments expressed could be found in thousands of speeches given for the last 200 years in the US, and probably way beyond that outside our borders.  It would be like accusing her of plagiarism had she said "mom and apple pie."   And, think of this, why in heck would she (or anyone else) knowingly steal from Michele Obama?  Talk about giving your opponent a knife to stab you with.  In the age of Google everyone knows that every word uttered by anyone in the political arena gets "googled."  No one is that stupid, not even the Trumps.  Had I the skills and the time, I'll bet I could create "side by side" video of Michele Obama's speech making it look like she stole "directly" from Nancy Reagan, Laura Bush, and probably Tokyo Rose. 

I think the US is in deep trouble, no matter which of the two disgusting individuals is elected.  But I have equal disgust for a media that has nothing better to do than tear down, accuse, denigrate someone who merely made a reasonably nice, oft repeated, paean to family, hard work, and the American notion that hard work and honesty can get you somewhere in this country.  Fer Pete's sake!

Rand

[Rand47]

I actually agree with you (on the distinction between facts and opinions):

Man, this is depressingly post-modern (the illustration).  Facts = opinions as though that is the objective truth of the matter.  If your opinion (fact claim) is that drinking poison is harmless, and my opinion (fact claim) is that it will kill you... I suspect that "facts as possibly objective truth" might prove itself very quickly one way or the other.  There is of course a whole world of things that are claimed as "facts" that don't belong in that category - that's part of the problem.  But to come to the conclusion, because of category errors, that facts = opinions, is intellectual suicide.

Rand

[pegelli]

What I find amazing about this whole tempest in a teapot re the supposed plagiarism is that the words, phrases, sentiments expressed could be found in thousands of speeches given for the last 200 years in the US, and probably way beyond that outside our borders.  It would be like accusing her of plagiarism had she said "mom and apple pie."   And, think of this, why in heck would she (or anyone else) knowingly steal from Michele Obama?  Talk about giving your opponent a knife to stab you with.  In the age of Google everyone knows that every word uttered by anyone in the political arena gets "googled."  No one is that stupid, not even the Trumps.  Had I the skills and the time, I'll bet I could create "side by side" video of Michele Obama's speech making it look like she stole "directly" from Nancy Reagan, Laura Bush, and probably Tokyo Rose. 

I think you're being way too nice and overestimating the intelligence of Mrs Trump and/or her advisors (which she said she used as little as possible ).
The way you define it any music played is plagiarism, because all the notes have been used before.
She even reused parts of the speech that weren't applicable to her youth and upbringing, that tells me enough.

But, as Slobodan pointed out, it's just an opinion, no more, no less