Should celebrities avoid talking politics to fans ?

1234689

Comments

  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 37,492
    PJPOWER said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    And you were the one that mentioned anecdotal arguments...laughable.
    That wasn't an anecdotal argument. Laughable indeed!
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 37,492
    my2hands said:

    the root base for conservatives issue is the protests in general... I know it, you know it... so you guys on the right are sticking to this blocking traffic thing like this is some national epidemic because when you all originally spoke out about the protests, people came right back and reminded you it was as American as apple pie to protest... so then you had to shift and find some part of the protests that were easy targets... that's why you overly focus on the few knuckleheads that riot & loot, or the few times a road is blocked... that's not your real issue, your real issue is the protest and protesters in general

    Yup. Or, even if that isn't their real issue, they've been conned into thinking that way anyhow.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,098
    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • rustneversleepsrustneversleeps DowntownPosts: 1,604
    ARGUE!!
    {1996} Columbia, MD 9/24 - NYC 9/28 {1998} Camden, NJ 8/28-8/29 {2000} Jones Beach, NY 8/25 - Camden, NJ 9/1-9/2 {2003} West Palm Beach, FL 4/11 - Phila, PA 4/28 - Buffalo, NY 5/2 - State College, PA 5/3 - Camden, NJ 7/5-7/6 - NYC 7/9 {2004} Reading, PA 10/1 {2005} George, WA 9/1 - Vancouver, BC 9/2 - Atlantic City, NJ 9/30 - Phila, PA 10/3 {2006} NYC 5/5 - Boston, MA 5/25 - Camden, NJ 5/27-5/28 - East Rutherford, NJ 6/1-6/3 - Las Vegas, NV 7/6 {2007} Chicago, IL 8/5 {2008} Manchester, TN 6/14 - Virginia Beach, VA 6/17 - Camden, NJ 6/19-6/20 - Washington, DC 6/22 {2009} Phila, PA 10/27-10/30-10/31 {2012} Phila, PA 9/2 {2013} Chicago, IL 7/19 - Brooklyn, NY 10/19 - Phila, PA 10/21-10/22 - Hartford, CT 10/25 - Baltimore, MD 10/27 - Seattle, WA 12/6 {2014} Lincoln, NE 10/9 - Austin, TX 10/12 - Detroit, MI 10/16 - Moline, IL 10/17 - Denver, CO 10/22 - Mountain View, CA 10/25 {2015} NYC 9/26 {2016} Greenville, SC 4/16 - Hampton, VA 4/18 - Phila, PA 4/28-4/29 - NYC 5/1-5/2 - Telluride, CO 7/9 - Boston, MA 8/5 - Chicago, IL 8/20-8/22 {2017} RRHOF Brooklyn, NY 4/7

    <--EV--> {2008} NYC 8/5 {2009} Albany, NY 6/9 {2015} Rosemont, IL 5/14 {2017} Dana Point, CA 9/9

    <--TOTD--> Phila 11/4-11/5 - Seattle 11/20-11/21
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    edited March 21
    PJ_Soul said:

    mace1229 said:

    Inconvenience is when the grocery store union goes on strike and I have to go to the other side of town to get groceries. This is beyond inconvenience, and is illegal. I really dont know why there is a debate, if something is illegal, being part of a protest should not excuse illegal activity. If you don't, be prepared to be arrested.

    There is a debate because it just isn't a black and white issue. Most things aren't.
    How much more black and white can it get? Pedestrians on the freeway is illegal. Doesn't matter what your cause is, if you intentionally march onto a freeway and block traffic that is illegal. That law should be enforced. You keep talking about gray area. Whats so gray about that? There's a law, you break it, there's a consequence. Very black and white. I'm not sure why you've referred to this as a gray area a few times. Here's what I picture a gray area. The time my brother and I were playing with model rockets and I launched one into his stomach. The nose cone was fully embedded inside him, I thought I just killed him. We threw him into the car and drove triple the speed limit, running every stop sign and fed light on the way to the hospital. We chose to break some traffic laws, but it was truly a life or death. That's a gray area.
    There are literally thousands of ways and places to protest without breaking the law. It's not a gray area to knowingly and willingly break laws in the course of a protest.
    And if you don't support people breaking laws while protesting, then you're against protesters in general? No one has even implied people shouldn't protest. I just think they should find way to do it without breaking the law, which most do. That hardly makes someone anti-protester.
    I just have to disagree on this. Seems very black and white, the laws are very clear and known to everyone, and posted very clearly. Anyone protesting on a freeway knows 100% they are breaking the law. And accusing anyone against protesters breaking the law as being against protesters in general is such an inaccurate reach.
    Post edited by mace1229 on
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    edited March 21
    my2hands said:

    the root base for conservatives issue is the protests in general... I know it, you know it... so you guys on the right are sticking to this blocking traffic thing like this is some national epidemic because when you all originally spoke out about the protests, people came right back and reminded you it was as American as apple pie to protest... so then you had to shift and find some part of the protests that were easy targets... that's why you overly focus on the few knuckleheads that riot & loot, or the few times a road is blocked... that's not your real issue, your real issue is the protest and protesters in general

    We're sticking to this blocking traffic thing because a claim was made that protester's rights are violated, and when asked, the only example given was people were being ticketed and/or arrested when blocking a freeway. From there it evolved into this conversation where we should have the right to march on the freeway.
    I still haven't seen a large scale example (or any example for that matter) of republicans taking away the rights of protesters. Enforcing the law isn't taking away one;s rights.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    There's no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary.
    All publicity is good if it is intelligent.
    The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.
    You've been hanging with Trump and Kim Kardashian too long.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    edited March 21
    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    PJ_Soul said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    I wasn't thinking about you at all. It was hyperbole (were you really late picking your kid up from ballet class?? If so, that is a funny coincidence!). Anyway, I'm sure that with smartphones and everything, your 7 year old isn't getting stranded on a street corner by her dance teacher. Yeah, it's a pain in the ass, but let's stay realistic here. You are able to keep in touch pretty easily these days to prevent nightmare scenarios. Perhaps we shouldn't base our belief systems on our worst imaginations, eh?

    But come on man, now you're suggesting a person needs to have kids to understand?
    Gymnastics actually..
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,876
    edited March 21
    my2hands said:

    the root base for conservatives issue is the protests in general... I know it, you know it... so you guys on the right are sticking to this blocking traffic thing like this is some national epidemic because when you all originally spoke out about the protests, people came right back and reminded you it was as American as apple pie to protest... so then you had to shift and find some part of the protests that were easy targets... that's why you overly focus on the few knuckleheads that riot & loot, or the few times a road is blocked... that's not your real issue, your real issue is the protest and protesters in general

    Wow, you really are full of shit. No one spoke out against protests in general, just the illegal non-peaceful version. Show me a few quotes where what you are claiming happened. Stop making stuff up, please. And if you would actually read and pay attention, it is not only conservatives speaking out here against the idiots that think they have the right to block highways and damage property.
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • my2handsmy2hands Posts: 12,842
    Sounds like I hit a nerve... the truth tends to do that
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    my2hands said:

    Sounds like I hit a nerve... the truth tends to do that

    Your previous statement was just incorrect. Blocking traffic wasn't brought up by conservatives because it was an "easy target." It was brought up as "proof" that the right to protest was being taken away. That is how this whole conversation started.
    Which is ridiculous. No one has ever had the right to break laws while protesting without facing legal consequences. So your accusations just weren't accurate. No one is against peaceful and lawful protests. Scroll up, read the whole conversation, and you'll see who and why it was brought up. Do that before you jump in and make false accusations.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,876
    my2hands said:

    Sounds like I hit a nerve... the truth tends to do that

    So does false accusations/lies.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • eddieceddiec Posts: 2,515
    edited March 21
    I mentioned this in a thread a while back that related to this topic. I'll try and make it short:

    I often visit a town just outside Akumal, Mexico. About 1 1/2 hours south of Cancun. Highway from Cancun to the south has gotten bigger and more congested over the years. People living in Akumal pueblo had to cross highway to get to work on the beach side of the highway. People wanted the government to build a footbridge over highway. Letters were written, etc but nothing done. Eventually an 18 year old girl from the pueblo was killed by a car when she was crossing the highway on her way to work. Still government wouldn't build a footbridge.

    Solution: Locals all gathered in protest and sat on the highway which blocked traffic for hours in both directions.
    Result: Government built a footbridge.

    I think this is an example that warranted the blockage of a major road.

  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,876
    eddiec said:

    I mentioned this in a thread a while back that related to this topic. I'll try and make it short:

    I often visit a town just outside Akumal, Mexico. About 1 1/2 hours south of Cancun. Highway from Cancun to the south has gotten bigger and more congested over the years. People living in Akumal pueblo had to cross highway to get to work on the beach side of the highway. People wanted the government to build a footbridge over highway. Letters were written, etc but nothing done. Eventually an 18 year old girl from the pueblo was killed by a car when she was crossing the highway on her way to work. Still government wouldn't build a footbridge.

    Solution: Locals all gathered in protest and sat on the highway which blocked traffic for hours in both directions.
    Result: Government built a footbridge.

    I think this is an example that warranted the blockage of a major road.

    I feel like that is a pretty specific scenario. One that does not really apply to what is being discussed here in relation to US peaceful vs non-peaceful protests and the motivations for standing out in the middle of a perfectly good highway and actually causing dangerous situations. I get the point you're trying to make, though.
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,098
    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    edited March 21
    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    So because something horrible happened to one child, I don't have the right to be worried about my child? Is worry binary? Can I only care for one child and if it's not someone that I don't know, I'm a bad person?

    No offense, but I have no idea what the hell that situation has to do with mine.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    eddiec said:

    I mentioned this in a thread a while back that related to this topic. I'll try and make it short:

    I often visit a town just outside Akumal, Mexico. About 1 1/2 hours south of Cancun. Highway from Cancun to the south has gotten bigger and more congested over the years. People living in Akumal pueblo had to cross highway to get to work on the beach side of the highway. People wanted the government to build a footbridge over highway. Letters were written, etc but nothing done. Eventually an 18 year old girl from the pueblo was killed by a car when she was crossing the highway on her way to work. Still government wouldn't build a footbridge.

    Solution: Locals all gathered in protest and sat on the highway which blocked traffic for hours in both directions.
    Result: Government built a footbridge.

    I think this is an example that warranted the blockage of a major road.

    I wouldn't say blocking a road is never acceptable. But if you're going to break the law in a protest, you have to be willing to accept the legal consequences. And my point was that enforcing the law is not an example of government taking away rights to protest.
    I do also feel that your example is more appropriate that what we see here. The protest was specifically about the road they were blocking. Makes total sense for that to happen. Doesn't makes sense to me that movements like BLM will block major highways, it is unrelated to what they are protesting. And if they choose to do so, they need to be willing to accept the consequences. Which is usually a fine, or maybe a day in jail, were not talking years in prison.
  • PJPOWERPJPOWER In Yo FacePosts: 2,876
    edited March 21
    mace1229 said:

    eddiec said:

    I mentioned this in a thread a while back that related to this topic. I'll try and make it short:

    I often visit a town just outside Akumal, Mexico. About 1 1/2 hours south of Cancun. Highway from Cancun to the south has gotten bigger and more congested over the years. People living in Akumal pueblo had to cross highway to get to work on the beach side of the highway. People wanted the government to build a footbridge over highway. Letters were written, etc but nothing done. Eventually an 18 year old girl from the pueblo was killed by a car when she was crossing the highway on her way to work. Still government wouldn't build a footbridge.

    Solution: Locals all gathered in protest and sat on the highway which blocked traffic for hours in both directions.
    Result: Government built a footbridge.

    I think this is an example that warranted the blockage of a major road.

    I wouldn't say blocking a road is never acceptable. But if you're going to break the law in a protest, you have to be willing to accept the legal consequences. And my point was that enforcing the law is not an example of government taking away rights to protest.
    I do also feel that your example is more appropriate that what we see here. The protest was specifically about the road they were blocking. Makes total sense for that to happen. Doesn't makes sense to me that movements like BLM will block major highways, it is unrelated to what they are protesting. And if they choose to do so, they need to be willing to accept the consequences. Which is usually a fine, or maybe a day in jail, were not talking years in prison.
    Exactly! Not entirely sure what the laws are in other countries...
    Post edited by PJPOWER on
    "At least I'm housebroken"
  • CM189191CM189191 Minneapolis via ChicagoPosts: 3,098
    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    So because something horrible happened to one child, I don't have the right to be worried about my child? Is worry binary? Can I only care for one child and if it's not someone that I don't know, I'm a bad person?

    No offense, but I have no idea what the hell that situation has to do with mine.
    Point being: you were worried about your child for 2 hours. Because they were what? Sitting safely at daycare waiting for you?

    There is an entire demographic that has to explain to their 7 year old children that they have a disproportionate chance of being arrested, shot or killed. They worry every minute of everyday their children will be unfairly discriminated against simply because of the color of their skin. Your 2 hours of inconvenience is but a fraction of what others experience.

    You're right to be worried about your own child's safety. But if sitting in traffic for 2 hours of protesting doesn't make you stop, think and empathize with what other people and their children are experiencing; then yes, that makes you a bad and selfish person. You appear to be more concerned about punishing those who have already been slighted; rather than understanding why they need to stand in the middle of the expressway in order to make their voices heard.
    WI 6/27/98 WI 10/8/00 MO 10/11/00 IL 4/23/03 MN 6/26/06 MN 6/27/06 WI 6/30/06 IL 8/5/07 IL 8/21/08 (EV) IL 8/22/08 (EV) IL 8/23/09 IL 8/24/09 IN 5/7/10 IL 6/28/11 (EV) IL 6/29/11 (EV) WI 9/3/11 WI 9/4/11 IL 7/19/13 NE 10/09/14 IL 10/17/14 MN 10/19/14 FL 4/11/16 IL 8/20/16 IL 8/22/16
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    So because something horrible happened to one child, I don't have the right to be worried about my child? Is worry binary? Can I only care for one child and if it's not someone that I don't know, I'm a bad person?

    No offense, but I have no idea what the hell that situation has to do with mine.
    Point being: you were worried about your child for 2 hours. Because they were what? Sitting safely at daycare waiting for you?

    There is an entire demographic that has to explain to their 7 year old children that they have a disproportionate chance of being arrested, shot or killed. They worry every minute of everyday their children will be unfairly discriminated against simply because of the color of their skin. Your 2 hours of inconvenience is but a fraction of what others experience.

    You're right to be worried about your own child's safety. But if sitting in traffic for 2 hours of protesting doesn't make you stop, think and empathize with what other people and their children are experiencing; then yes, that makes you a bad and selfish person. You appear to be more concerned about punishing those who have already been slighted; rather than understanding why they need to stand in the middle of the expressway in order to make their voices heard.
    First.. you don't NEED to stand in the roadway to make your voice heard. That's the fallacy of the whole thing. I was sympathetic to the movement and generally agreed with it. And who am I punishing that has been slighted? The brave souls who have been oppressed for years and are finally standing up? Or these white kids, most of them from VCU and UVA who were the ones blocking the road. Are they the victims? Is their public Ivy education at UVA a continuation of what they must have experienced growing up?


  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    So because something horrible happened to one child, I don't have the right to be worried about my child? Is worry binary? Can I only care for one child and if it's not someone that I don't know, I'm a bad person?

    No offense, but I have no idea what the hell that situation has to do with mine.
    Point being: you were worried about your child for 2 hours. Because they were what? Sitting safely at daycare waiting for you?

    There is an entire demographic that has to explain to their 7 year old children that they have a disproportionate chance of being arrested, shot or killed. They worry every minute of everyday their children will be unfairly discriminated against simply because of the color of their skin. Your 2 hours of inconvenience is but a fraction of what others experience.

    You're right to be worried about your own child's safety. But if sitting in traffic for 2 hours of protesting doesn't make you stop, think and empathize with what other people and their children are experiencing; then yes, that makes you a bad and selfish person. You appear to be more concerned about punishing those who have already been slighted; rather than understanding why they need to stand in the middle of the expressway in order to make their voices heard.
    I was following this conversation and I have to say I was equally confused. I have no idea what Marcus Abrams has to do with this topic.
    From what was said, his daughter wasn't at daycare, but at dance (or gymnastics or something) practice.
    Many of these places dont require adult supervision until kids are picked up, when the class ends, the place closes. I would definitely be worried about a 7 year old. Even if there is another class and she has to wait around for 2 hours, I'd be worried she'd get scared and wonder off looking for her ride home. I dont know a single 7 year old with a phone, so I'm not sure how modern technology is going to make it easy to communicate.
    Fearing for a 7 year old alone for 2 hours is a legitimate concern, I'm not clear why it is being minimized.
  • jeffbrjeffbr SeattlePosts: 5,552
    mace1229 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    CM189191 said:

    mrussel1 said:

    PJ_Soul said:


    mrussel1 said:

    my2hands said:

    how come all you anti-protest republicans didn't have a problem with a republican governor closing down a bridge? I wonder how many emergency vehicles were slowed or diverted because of that?

    I'm not Republican or anti-protest.. and I brought up the NJ bridge several times.. But I still think you should follow the laws when protesting. The goal of a protests should be to garner support for your cause. Anything that turns an ordinary citizen without a dog in the fight, against you, is an unsuccessful protest.
    According to half the people on this board alone, making someone 10 minutes late to pick their kid up from ballet class will turn them against protestors, no matter what they are protesting. Perhaps immediate local public sentiment isn't actually the end all and be all of how successful a protest is.
    That was me.. and it wasn't 10 minutes. It was at least 90 minutes, maybe closer to 2 hours. And it was during rush hour. Maybe you don't have kids so you don't think of things this way, but when you're late, you can only imagine (the worst imagination) what is happening with your 7 year old daughter standing? waiting? sitting? outside waiting for you. The worst thoughts go through your mind.
    Right? Think of all the terrible things that could happen to your child, when all they want to do is go home?

    That's kind of the point: Metropolitan Transit police officers used excessive force in arresting an autistic teenager in St. Paul in 2015, according to a lawsuit filed in Ramsey County District Court that seeks $350,000 in damages. The suit said Abrams and his friends were on their way home from work at the Minnesota State Fair

    But what do I know? Maybe your kid's the 'right' color and doesn't have anything to worry about.
    I don't get your point. My daughter isn't a 15 year old roaming the streets.. she was a 7 year old little girl. This wasn't a race issue for me.
    You mentioned being worried about your daughter because it took 2 hours to get through traffic.

    How long do you think Marcus Abrams' mom/gf/roommate waited for him to come home from work that day?
    So because something horrible happened to one child, I don't have the right to be worried about my child? Is worry binary? Can I only care for one child and if it's not someone that I don't know, I'm a bad person?

    No offense, but I have no idea what the hell that situation has to do with mine.
    Point being: you were worried about your child for 2 hours. Because they were what? Sitting safely at daycare waiting for you?

    There is an entire demographic that has to explain to their 7 year old children that they have a disproportionate chance of being arrested, shot or killed. They worry every minute of everyday their children will be unfairly discriminated against simply because of the color of their skin. Your 2 hours of inconvenience is but a fraction of what others experience.

    You're right to be worried about your own child's safety. But if sitting in traffic for 2 hours of protesting doesn't make you stop, think and empathize with what other people and their children are experiencing; then yes, that makes you a bad and selfish person. You appear to be more concerned about punishing those who have already been slighted; rather than understanding why they need to stand in the middle of the expressway in order to make their voices heard.
    I was following this conversation and I have to say I was equally confused. I have no idea what Marcus Abrams has to do with this topic.
    From what was said, his daughter wasn't at daycare, but at dance (or gymnastics or something) practice.
    Many of these places don't require adult supervision until kids are picked up, when the class ends, the place closes. I would definitely be worried about a 7 year old. Even if there is another class and she has to wait around for 2 hours, I'd be worried she'd get scared and wonder off looking for her ride home. I dont know a single 7 year old with a phone, so I'm not sure how modern technology is going to make it easy to communicate.
    Fearing for a 7 year old alone for 2 hours is a legitimate concern, I'm not clear why it is being minimized.
    Neither am I. This conversation went sideways, and CM really lost touch with reality. Clearly not a parent (or shouldn't be) if he doesn't understand why having one's child standing outside alone for a couple of hours wouldn't be of concern to the father. Christ. I understand that there can be disagreements regarding the efficacy and impact of blocking freeways, but to disregard real concern over safety of a loved one and spin it as selfish shows a massive disconnect from reality.
    "I'll use the magic word - let's just shut the fuck up, please." EV, 04/13/08
  • PJ_SoulPJ_Soul Vancouver, BCPosts: 37,492
    edited March 21
    My argument was more that a 7 year old wouldn't be left standing outside alone at all (since that would be illegal), so the concern is more a red herring in the argument. That wouldn't happen this day and age unless they have already been left in the care of someone who is completely unqualified to care for children in the first place.
    With all its sham, drudgery, and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world. Be careful. Strive to be happy. ~ Desiderata
  • dignindignin Posts: 5,286
    Strange and interesting turn on this thread. Drivers vs. non-drivers. Parents vs. childless.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    PJ_Soul said:

    My argument was more that a 7 year old wouldn't be left standing outside alone at all (since that would be illegal), so the concern is more a red herring in the argument. That wouldn't happen this day and age unless they have already been left in the care of someone who is completely unqualified to care for children in the first place.

    PJ_Soul said:

    My argument was more that a 7 year old wouldn't be left standing outside alone at all (since that would be illegal), so the concern is more a red herring in the argument. That wouldn't happen this day and age unless they have already been left in the care of someone who is completely unqualified to care for children in the first place.

    It wasn't your comments that were shocking to me. Others dismissed his concerns as a father and even said how hard is it to keep in touch when we all have cell phones. 7 year olds don't.
    And if it was a day care, or a school function then it would be illegal. A lot of these private lessons though dont have the same standards. They may run class after class, and if you arent there to pick up your kid they wouldn't eve notice your kid sitting alone in the lobby. Or the instructor may be some 20 year old kid who just closes shop and leaves, that may be illegal (just like walking on the freeway:) ) but it still happens.
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757
    mace1229 said:

    PJ_Soul said:

    My argument was more that a 7 year old wouldn't be left standing outside alone at all (since that would be illegal), so the concern is more a red herring in the argument. That wouldn't happen this day and age unless they have already been left in the care of someone who is completely unqualified to care for children in the first place.

    PJ_Soul said:

    My argument was more that a 7 year old wouldn't be left standing outside alone at all (since that would be illegal), so the concern is more a red herring in the argument. That wouldn't happen this day and age unless they have already been left in the care of someone who is completely unqualified to care for children in the first place.

    It wasn't your comments that were shocking to me. Others dismissed his concerns as a father and even said how hard is it to keep in touch when we all have cell phones. 7 year olds don't.
    And if it was a day care, or a school function then it would be illegal. A lot of these private lessons though dont have the same standards. They may run class after class, and if you arent there to pick up your kid they wouldn't eve notice your kid sitting alone in the lobby. Or the instructor may be some 20 year old kid who just closes shop and leaves, that may be illegal (just like walking on the freeway:) ) but it still happens.
    Or my 7 year old wanders off..... Like I said, you aren't thinking rationally about the most likely situation, you are thinking the worst. It's natural.
  • mace1229mace1229 Posts: 1,653
    you think a 7 year old sitting by herself for 2 hours isn't going to get scared and wonder off?
    It wouldnt happen every time, but it is very likely for a small child to get scared when they dont see their parents and go looking for them.
  • HughFreakingDillonHughFreakingDillon WinnipegPosts: 11,969
    mrussel1 said:

    mace1229 said:

    Of course they have the right to.
    For me it isn't about the topic, I wouldn't care what side they are one, its about wanting to see them perform. If I drop $200 to see Pearl Jam, I'd be pissed if Ed spent 20 minutes talking about politics in the middle of the show.
    After I moved out of LA I have to drive over an hour for almost any major concert, often on a weeknight and pay for a babysitter. The whole time my thoughts would be how I'll be getting home at 12:30 or 1:00 after spending 30 minutes to just exit the parking structure, wake up at 5:45 to go to work, and spend an extra $5 on the babysitter for this speech where everyone knows his views anyway. But keep it to a brief comment here and there I wouldn't have a complaint.
    But if you're going to blame it on "butthurt conservatives" you must think no one would care if some other artist spent 20 minutes talking about being pro-life in a show? Yeah, right.

    Your'e taking an egregious example of something that didn't necessarily happen. I'd be annoyed if Ed spent 20 minutes talking about ANYTHING in a show, not just politics.
    he brought out a doc who talked about EB for about 17 or so minutes at St Paul in the middle of the show. Show killer. Almost.
    T minus 9 days and counting..........
  • mrussel1mrussel1 Posts: 7,757

    mrussel1 said:

    mace1229 said:

    Of course they have the right to.
    For me it isn't about the topic, I wouldn't care what side they are one, its about wanting to see them perform. If I drop $200 to see Pearl Jam, I'd be pissed if Ed spent 20 minutes talking about politics in the middle of the show.
    After I moved out of LA I have to drive over an hour for almost any major concert, often on a weeknight and pay for a babysitter. The whole time my thoughts would be how I'll be getting home at 12:30 or 1:00 after spending 30 minutes to just exit the parking structure, wake up at 5:45 to go to work, and spend an extra $5 on the babysitter for this speech where everyone knows his views anyway. But keep it to a brief comment here and there I wouldn't have a complaint.
    But if you're going to blame it on "butthurt conservatives" you must think no one would care if some other artist spent 20 minutes talking about being pro-life in a show? Yeah, right.

    Your'e taking an egregious example of something that didn't necessarily happen. I'd be annoyed if Ed spent 20 minutes talking about ANYTHING in a show, not just politics.
    he brought out a doc who talked about EB for about 17 or so minutes at St Paul in the middle of the show. Show killer. Almost.
    I know.. I edited that show and that part killed me. It was interesting for a few minutes but after he started introducing the band like they were in a living room... it went far too far. By contrast, his very moving speech in Hartford just before Life Wasted was an excellent use of 2 minutes. It was painful but so very necessary.
This discussion has been closed.