FERGUSON

[Bad Wolf]

Tragedy is a bit of a strong word isn't it? I don't know what he was like but you don't really get the impression that he was a very nice man, at least, not from this photo.

Technically, "tragedy" does not require that the person who either suffers from or causes the bad events was nice or innocent. Quite the contrary, actually. The very word means it was caused by human failing.

For example, if someone walks outside and is struck by lightning (due to an random event of nature, not some punishment by any god) and dies, that is NOT a tragedy. There was no human action which caused the bad event and there was no way the man could possibly have foreseen the consequences to walking outside at that moment. Some people might call it "a tragedy" that but that is a misuse of the word.

"Tragedy" is where the bad event was avoidable and caused by human factors. If someone walks outside while drunk, gets in a car and kills himself when he drives it off a cliff because of his intoxication, that IS a tragedy. Similarly, if he were to kill someone else because of his actions, driving while drunk, that would also be a "tragedy".

Michael Brown, whatever you may think of him personally, did not need to die that day. Therefore, his death was a "tragedy" in the proper use of the word. The only debate is who's fault you think it was. Was it his human failings or the police officer's or both?

Oh well there you go then. I got confused cause nobody really makes that distinction. Whenever i've heard the word used, it's always just meant: something really bad.

[A Theist]

Perhaps the reason why the police had an arbitrary "end time" set to the protest "after sundown" was because they feared the looters and rioters would return after dark and mingle in with the protestors. That seems far more likely than buying into the racist conspiracy narrative.

Oh, I see. So all protests are subject to the disperse-by-sundown rule? I assume Tea Bagger protests were also met with armored vehicles, snipers and full riot gear with the orders to disperse by a certain time or be treated as rioters?

BTW, what are your thoughts about Condoleeza Rice, Clarence Thomas, Allen West, and Dr. Ben Carson?

Why is it that in any discussion of race in America, it's inevitable that someone on the right wing will say some variation on "you know, I have black friends"? Do you actually think this argument works on anyone?

Oh, I see. So all protests are subject to the disperse-by-sundown rule? I assume Tea Bagger protests were also met with armored vehicles, snipers and full riot gear with the orders to disperse by a certain time or be treated as rioters?

Probably because Tea Party rallies don't turn violent with looting, arson, and tearing down their damn city like the rioters did in Ferguson.

Why is it that in any discussion of race in America, it's inevitable that someone on the right wing will say some variation on "you know, I have black friends"? Do you actually think this argument works on anyone?

That's not what I said. I was pointing out Min's selective racial tolerance. He's like most of you on the far left. You guys can tolerate blacks and minorities who agree with you, but you go bat shit crazy against blacks and minorities who are conservative and who don't ascribe to your leftist ideology. You guys on the far left are disingenuous hypocrites and you're closet racists.

[Cato]

You guys can tolerate blacks and minorities who agree with you, but you go bat shit crazy against blacks and minorities who are conservative and who don't ascribe to your leftist ideology. You guys on the far left are disingenuous hypocrites and you're closet racists.

Are you saying the left is racist by default if I disagree with Thomas' court decisions or West's policy opinions? Hmmmm, where have I heard this before?

[simplemoss]

So I guess when someone calls the Republican party racist, the only defense in the world they have left is:

"I am rubber you are glue whatever u say bounces off of me and sticks too you"

[Hoopington]

[quote='Hoopington' pid='809103' dateline='1417618041']
A pretty powerful message here:
...

I really am disturbed that anyone even photoshoped this sign at all to read like the altered version did. Making jokes like this is like dancing on someone's grave. Even if you believe Wilson acted correctly or was justified, at the very least the death of Michael Brown should be a tragedy.

Really? I'm far more disturbed that anyone would think any subject beyond comedy and humour.

I imagine your house is a whole lot of fun.

---

Tragedy is a bit of a strong word isn't it? I don't know what he was like but you don't really get the impression that he was a very nice man, at least, not from this photo.

Technically, "tragedy" does not require that the person who either suffers from or causes the bad events was nice or innocent. Quite the contrary, actually. The very word means it was caused by human failing.

For example, if someone walks outside and is struck by lightning (due to an random event of nature, not some punishment by any god) and dies, that is NOT a tragedy. There was no human action which caused the bad event and there was no way the man could possibly have foreseen the consequences to walking outside at that moment. Some people might call it "a tragedy" that but that is a misuse of the word.

"Tragedy" is where the bad event was avoidable and caused by human factors. If someone walks outside while drunk, gets in a car and kills himself when he drives it off a cliff because of his intoxication, that IS a tragedy. Similarly, if he were to kill someone else because of his actions, driving while drunk, that would also be a "tragedy".

Michael Brown, whatever you may think of him personally, did not need to die that day. Therefore, his death was a "tragedy" in the proper use of the word. The only debate is who's fault you think it was. Was it his human failings or the police officer's or both?

I was going to question your assertion that this bloke's death was a "tragedy," but we're ahead of the game. Just peachy.

I'm afraid to say, your definition is just wrong. Please show me one definition that specifies a tragedy has to be "caused by human factors." Maybe you're confusing the Shakespearean, so no doubt human made, "tragedy" with the type that usually means death and/or destruction. I don't know.

A Tsunami or Earthquake killing untold numbers wouldn't qualify?

No offence intended, but that is absolute rubbish.

[Strider]

That's not what I said. I was pointing out Min's selective racial tolerance. He's like most of you on the far left. You guys can tolerate blacks and minorities who agree with you, but you go bat shit crazy against blacks and minorities who are conservative and who don't ascribe to your leftist ideology. You guys on the far left are disingenuous hypocrites and you're closet racists.

Awesome blanket statement. Since you paint in broad strokes, I will too. Conservatives are worse than disingenuous hypocrites - they are ignorant pawns played in a game to further enrich the corporatists. Conservatives watch their own middle-class existence (if they were such to begin with) erode away while the rich get richer and the rest of us descend to impoverishment.

[DeistPaladin]

Oh well there you go then. I got confused cause nobody really makes that distinction. Whenever i've heard the word used, it's always just meant: something really bad.

Yeah, don't I know it. It ranks up there with the misused word "theory", which causes no small amount of problem with yokels who then claim evolution is "just a theory".

Lately the word "literally" has also been abused. It's no longer is the antonym for "metaphorically". It's become just a flavoring word along the lines of "really" or "very".

Words need to mean what they are agreed upon to mean or we lose our ability to communicate ideas. I am literally face palming as I think about the tragic failure in our public education system that so many people can say evolution is "just a theory" and think that's a good argument.

---

A Tsunami or Earthquake killing untold numbers wouldn't qualify? [as a "tragedy"]

No offence intended, but that is absolute rubbish.

Well, perhaps the dictionary has been updated to reflect how this word has been abused and misused. Language evolves and perhaps I should keep up.

From dictionary.com

1. a dramatic composition, often in verse, dealing with a serious or somber theme, typically that of a great person destined through a flaw of character or conflict with some overpowering force, as fate or society, to downfall or destruction.
2. the branch of the drama that is concerned with this form of composition.
3. the art and theory of writing and producing tragedies.
4. any literary composition, as a novel, dealing with a somber theme carried to a tragic conclusion.
5.
the tragic element of drama, of literature generally, or of life.
6. a lamentable, dreadful, or fatal event or affair; calamity; disaster:
the tragedy of war.

That last one would seem to be a concession to the overuse of the word.

But yes, the definition I was taught in school was that the word "tragedy" is properly used it the ancient Greek/Shakespearean sense. It means a series of events that were avoidable but caused by some human failing.

Death by a tsunami or an earthquake is not a tragedy.

So call it "absolute rubbish" if you like. A more precise pejorative would be to say that I'm a grammar nazi. I still maintain we need to be more precise in our society with how we use words.

The word "literally" needs to be strictly used as an antonym for "metaphorically" or "proverbially", not as a meaningless flavor word. The word "theory" needs to be strictly used for a peer-reviewed explanation of something, not just some half-baked idea someone just came up with. The word "tragedy" needs to mean "bad events brought about by human failing that might have been avoided 'if only...' ", not just something bad happened.

---

Probably because Tea Party rallies don't turn violent with looting, arson, and tearing down their damn city like the rioters did in Ferguson.

Oh please stop with the racist smearing of entire communities to justify the jack-booted oppression. We have video footage of media camera crews being fired upon:




This video is just one of many examples. The police were not just trying to control rioters or arrest looters. There is simply no excuse for sweeping through restaurants and beating up reporters and arresting them for typing on a laptop. There is simply no excuse for firing tear gas into people's homes and backyards, simply because they were saying things the police didn't like. There is simply no excuse for deploying a militarized response to a peaceful protest.

This is the stuff I expected from the former Soviet Union, not America.

And you know damn well that if the Tea Bagger protests was met with the same crackdown from the local police, every conservative in America would be shrieking that Obama's fascism has come to America and they'd be demanding nothing less than the prosecution of the local police chief and the impeachment of Obama.

Hell, when the IRS asked a couple of questions to Tea Bagger groups before granting them non-profit status, that was a SCANDAL! Help, help, we're being oppressed! The local IRS asked some questions and delayed our application a bit. Oh noes! It must be a grand conspiracy that goes directly to the White House. Quick, launch another 15 congressional investigations! Impeach! Impeach!

That's not what I said.

That's exactly what you said. You have some token blacks like Thomas and think this absolves your party from the charge of racism.

This is a variation on the "I have black friends" argument.

[Hoopington]

Oh well there you go then. I got confused cause nobody really makes that distinction. Whenever i've heard the word used, it's always just meant: something really bad.

Yeah, don't I know it. It ranks up there with the misused word "theory", which causes no small amount of problem with yokels who then claim evolution is "just a theory".

Lately the word "literally" has also been abused. It's no longer is the antonym for "metaphorically". It's become just a flavoring word along the lines of "really" or "very".

Words need to mean what they are agreed upon to mean or we lose our ability to communicate ideas. I am literally face palming as I think about the tragic failure in our public education system that so many people can say evolution is "just a theory" and think that's a good argument.

---

A Tsunami or Earthquake killing untold numbers wouldn't qualify? [as a "tragedy"]

No offence intended, but that is absolute rubbish.

Well, perhaps the dictionary has been updated to reflect how this word has been abused and misused. Language evolves and perhaps I should keep up.

From dictionary.com

1. a dramatic composition, often in verse, dealing with a serious or somber theme, typically that of a great person destined through a flaw of character or conflict with some overpowering force, as fate or society, to downfall or destruction.
2. the branch of the drama that is concerned with this form of composition.
3. the art and theory of writing and producing tragedies.
4. any literary composition, as a novel, dealing with a somber theme carried to a tragic conclusion.
5.
the tragic element of drama, of literature generally, or of life.
6. a lamentable, dreadful, or fatal event or affair; calamity; disaster:
the tragedy of war.

That last one would seem to be a concession to the overuse of the word.

But yes, the definition I was taught in school was that the word "tragedy" is properly used it the ancient Greek/Shakespearean sense. It means a series of events that were avoidable but caused by some human failing.

Death by a tsunami or an earthquake is not a tragedy.

So call it "absolute rubbish" if you like. A more precise pejorative would be to say that I'm a grammar nazi. I still maintain we need to be more precise in our society with how we use words.

The word "literally" needs to be strictly used as an antonym for "metaphorically" or "proverbially", not as a meaningless flavor word. The word "theory" needs to be strictly used for a peer-reviewed explanation of something, not just some half-baked idea someone just came up with. The word "tragedy" needs to mean "bad events brought about by human failing that might have been avoided 'if only...' ", not just something bad happened.

---

Probably because Tea Party rallies don't turn violent with looting, arson, and tearing down their damn city like the rioters did in Ferguson.

Oh please stop with the racist smearing of entire communities to justify the jack-booted oppression. We have video footage of media camera crews being fired upon:




This video is just one of many examples. The police were not just trying to control rioters or arrest looters. There is simply no excuse for sweeping through restaurants and beating up reporters and arresting them for typing on a laptop. There is simply no excuse for firing tear gas into people's homes and backyards, simply because they were saying things the police didn't like. There is simply no excuse for deploying a militarized response to a peaceful protest.

This is the stuff I expected from the former Soviet Union, not America.

And you know damn well that if the Tea Bagger protests was met with the same crackdown from the local police, every conservative in America would be shrieking that Obama's fascism has come to America and they'd be demanding nothing less than the prosecution of the local police chief and the impeachment of Obama.

Hell, when the IRS asked a couple of questions to Tea Bagger groups before granting them non-profit status, that was a SCANDAL! Help, help, we're being oppressed! The local IRS asked some questions and delayed our application a bit. Oh noes! It must be a grand conspiracy that goes directly to the White House. Quick, launch another 15 congressional investigations! Impeach! Impeach!

That's not what I said.

That's exactly what you said. You have some token blacks like Thomas and think this absolves your party from the charge of racism.

This is a variation on the "I have black friends" argument.

Yes, it is a shame that language evolves..........

It has, and, sorry to say, you have misused it, no matter what you were taught:

First definition found on Google, you can keep on looking, but nowhere does it state, when referring to the first listed "tragedy," that the event has to man made...unless it's that pesky play:

1. an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress, such as a serious accident, crime, or natural catastrophe.
"a tragedy that killed 95 people"
synonyms: disaster, calamity, catastrophe, cataclysm, devastation, misfortune, misadventure, mishap, reverse, vicissitude, setback, trial, tribulation, affliction, blight, injury, adversity, sad event, serious accident; More
antonyms: fortune, joy
2.
a play dealing with tragic events and having an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.


Nowhere does it say the event causing great suffering has to be man made, and this incident definitely wasn't a play, novel or screenplay. Literally.

Your meaningless essay regarding your views on grammar, however much I may agree in principle, are irrelevant.

The original point made was regarding your assertion that this was a tragedy, I disagree. Sad? Very. Avoidable? Absolutely. Tragedy? Not even close.

[Heywood]

That's not what I said. I was pointing out Min's selective racial tolerance. He's like most of you on the far left. You guys can tolerate blacks and minorities who agree with you, but you go bat shit crazy against blacks and minorities who are conservative and who don't ascribe to your leftist ideology. You guys on the far left are disingenuous hypocrites and you're closet racists.

Awesome blanket statement. Since you paint in broad strokes, I will too. Conservatives are worse than disingenuous hypocrites - they are ignorant pawns played in a game to further enrich the corporatists. Conservatives watch their own middle-class existence (if they were such to begin with) erode away while the rich get richer and the rest of us descend to impoverishment.

If the Obamacare fiasco has taught us anything it is that it's actually the progressives who are the ignorant pawns played in a game to further enrich the corporatist. Only the progressives would mandate that everyone...by virtue of being born...be required by law to buy the product of their corporate fat cat buddies.

Now that this precedent is set....how many other corporations are going to be pouring astronomical amounts of money toward lobbying congress to mandate laws that their products get the same treatment.

You progressives gave the government all the power and then you bitch when people try to take advantage of that concentrated power. Your utter stupidity makes me sick.

[Hoopington]

Awesome blanket statement. Since you paint in broad strokes, I will too. Conservatives are worse than disingenuous hypocrites - they are ignorant pawns played in a game to further enrich the corporatists. Conservatives watch their own middle-class existence (if they were such to begin with) erode away while the rich get richer and the rest of us descend to impoverishment.

If the Obamacare fiasco has taught us anything it is that it's actually the progressives who are the ignorant pawns played in a game to further enrich the corporatist. Only the progressives would mandate that everyone...by virtue of being born...be required by law to buy the product of their corporate fat cat buddies.

Now that this precedent is set....how many other corporations are going to be pouring astronomical amounts of money toward lobbying congress to mandate laws that their products get the same treatment.

You progressives gave the government all the power and then you bitch when people try to take advantage of that concentrated power. Your utter stupidity makes me sick.

I have to be honest, the "does God exist" question aside....this Republican v Democrat argument is about as tiresome as, well, me actually.

Heywood, I'm assuming you're a republican right? Do you agree with EVERY policy and decision made by that party? Same question for Democrats....... all this blase generalisation just feeds the animals in charge because you never end up discussing policies, you're always simply trying to get one up on, or just outt argue the other side....whether the point of view you hold is the correct one, or if you even agree with it, seems to pale into insignificance compared to getting one over on the other side.

Which is exactly what your news stations and, at a guess, your politicians want.

I really do find it baffling.