Slashdot Mirror


Mark Zuckerberg Defends Peter Thiel's Trump Ties In Internal Memo (theverge.com)

Soon after it was announced that Project Include, a community for building meaningful, enduring diversity and inclusion into tech companies, would no longer work with Y Combinator startups, Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg defended Thiel's status as a Facebook board member in a message to employees. "We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate," Zuckerberg wrote. "There are many reasons a person might support Trump that do not involve racism, sexism, xenophobia, or accepting sexual assault." The Verge reports: A screenshot of the memo was posted to Hacker News yesterday, and it later surfaced on Boing Boing. A Facebook spokesman confirmed the authenticity of the five-paragraph memo to The Verge. It appears to have been posted on Facebook for Work, the enterprise version of Facebook that the company recently made available to other companies. Thiel's endorsement of Trump has put those CEOs in a difficult position. On one hand he is a close adviser; on the other, his support for an erratic, racist demagogue has outraged many of their employees and partners. Like Y Combinator's Sam Altman before him, Zuckerberg defended the company's ties to Thiel by saying that the company has a moral obligation to consider a variety of viewpoints, no matter how abhorrent. "We care deeply about diversity," Zuckerberg wrote. "That's easy to do when it means standing up for ideas you agree with. It's a lot harder when it means standing up for the rights of people with different viewpoints to say what they care about. That's even more important." Of course, as the designer Jason Putorti wrote on Medium this week, Thiel already has an outsized capacity to stand up for ideas he agrees with: he spent $1.25 million to promote them. Zuckerberg's memo reads as if he is defending Thiel's right to post on Facebook. In fact, the question is whether someone who promotes opposition to gender and racial equality should be allowed to serve as a steward for a company whose stated mission is to connect the world.

56 of 562 comments (clear)

  1. Minefield by 110010001000 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This SJW stuff is a minefield for companies that are trying to actually accomplish stuff. I suggest staying away and not answering their calls.

    1. Re:Minefield by cayenne8 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      the question is whether someone who promotes opposition to gender and racial equality should be allowed to serve as a steward for a company whose stated mission is to connect the world.

      Ok...I'm not the biggest Trump fan, hell, I con't care for either one of them...

      But with all that Trump has said or promoted, I've not seen yet where he came out to promote the agenda that is against equality in matters of gender and race.

      Has Thiel himself come out for these views against equality? If so, I missed that.

      Trump has said a lot of stupid shit, but I've not heard him yet say he was against racial or gender equality.

      This is really getting dangerous in this country, if people start getting blackballed, hired or fired for having expressed mere support for X political party or Y viewpoint.

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    2. Re:Minefield by OzPeter · · Score: 2

      This is really getting dangerous in this country, if people start getting blackballed, hired or fired for having expressed mere support for X political party or Y viewpoint.

      Its worse than that. The other day I was in a supermarket buying yogurt just as this old guy was walking past. When he saw the brand I was buying he commented loud enough for me to hear "Chobani supports the Muslim Brotherhood". Absolute pure full on conspiracy theory grade bullshit, yet I was virtually accosted in public for it. That is an indicator of the level of political discourse in the US at the moment.

      I look forward to the debate tonight because I need a good laugh.

      --
      I am Slashdot. Are you Slashdot as well?
    3. Re:Minefield by ADRA · · Score: 2, Insightful

      He wants to ban all Muslims from entering the US. If that's not an "agenda that is against equality", then what is?

      For women, apparently Google's your friend:
      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/wom...

      When you endorse a candidate you bind yourself to them warts and all. Don't like it? Rescind it and tell people you regret it... such as..
      http://rarehistoricalphotos.co...

      --
      Bye!
    4. Re:Minefield by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Interesting

      You mean Trump likes the ladies? Is that forbidden now? Has it now gotten to the point where I am more likely to be lynched for being like Hugh Hefner than Bruce Jenner?

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    5. Re:Minefield by topologist · · Score: 5, Informative

      Has Thiel himself come out for these views against equality? If so, I missed that.

      Thiel has stated that the 19th amendment to the United States constitution (granting female suffrage) has "rendered the notion of ‘capitalist democracy’ into an oxymoron.”

    6. Re:Minefield by TheNarrator · · Score: 2

      Why there is a culture war explains the whole SJW movement: http://www.hoover.org/research...

      I think the best defense Zuck could have given is that we need to include the traditional patriarchy and its hegemonic value system in our corporate dialog.

    7. Re:Minefield by tsotha · · Score: 2

      "Trump and his advocates" haven't destroyed anybody's trust. The fact that you really, really don't want him to be president and don't want anything to do with his supporters is an emotional problem on your part. It has nothing to do with business.

    8. Re:Minefield by tsotha · · Score: 2

      Trump is perfectly fine with Mexican immigration. Legal Mexican immigration. He wants a wall (along with most Americans) to keep people from coming into the country illegally.

    9. Re:Minefield by s.petry · · Score: 2

      I beg to differ with your "ignorant" statement. Trump is much smarter than people believed which is why he's doing much better than people ever conceived of. Not only has he had to contend with the Democratic machine (and Project Veritas gives us a glimpse into that corrupt cesspool), but a colluding media, and career politicians on the right who see him as a threat to their gravy train.

      Not telling you how to vote, just telling you that the narrative you hear has little factual basis. Consume all the facts you can from various sources before making a decision.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    10. Re:Minefield by JaredOfEuropa · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, it is, didn't you get the memo? Forbidden... well, only if you're running for office, for the time being.

      Sarcasm aside, it does seem that these days a presidential candidate can't be someone who openly likes the ladies, or admits to that in a private conversation, or did inhale during his college days, or had alcohol before he turned 21, or is an atheïst, or did something dumb when he was young, or had premarital sex, or a DUI, or used the N word at a drunken blowout, or or or. Well, maybe you can find a candidate with a spotless record, who will remain standing under the closest scrutiny, no skeletons in the closet. Would such a person make a good president? Hell, the idea of someone like that telling the rest of us what to do scares me more than a little...

      --
      If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
    11. Re: Minefield by LordLucless · · Score: 4, Informative

      His flagship policy is a wall to keep illegal immigrants out.

      --
      Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean there isn't an invisible demon about to eat your face
    12. Re:Minefield by TheNarrator · · Score: 2

      Sorry for replying to my own post, but I just came up with THE PERFECT paragraph justifying Thiel's board seat.

      " We incorporate hegemonic values such as pure meritocracy regardless of race, as represented by Thiel, but also the values of inclusion and diversity through our more progressive board members. By including both these perspectives we can selectively choose between these values where appropriate in order to maximize shareholder value effectively, which of course remains our highest and most important goal as a corporation".

      ^ This incorporates the most perfect essence of corporate America: We do and believe whatever it takes to make more money.

    13. Re:Minefield by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      His flagship policy is to build a wall to keep Mexicans out.

      No..to keep the ILLEGALLY border crossing Mexicans (and anyone else using that border) out.

      There's a big difference.

      I don't think many Americans have problems with LEGAL immigrants.

      We just want them to sign the fucking guest book on the way in, you know?

      --
      Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
    14. Re:Minefield by Gussington · · Score: 2

      Not only does Trump not have such an agenda, 99% of his followers have nothing to do with racism, sexism, xenophobia, or accepting sexual assault.

      How do you think political agendas work? I'll give you a hint, they're very rarely written down in black and white.
      eg Can you point to the where Hitler said he intends to gas the Jews?

    15. Re:Minefield by johanw · · Score: 2

      Ah well, I prefer a sexist racist pig over a warmonger like Hillary. Both are bad, but I think Hillary is worse.

    16. Re:Minefield by meta-monkey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If you're a Trump supporter and drop him over a single issue you happen to disagree with or a single scandal, what then?

      Move over to Hillary? Why? Because her political plank issues don't match you in any way, BUT AT LEAST SHE SUPPOSEDLY HASN'T EVER TOLD A SEX JOKE!

      The thing I find really amusing about the PussyLeaks issue is that the left demands I drop Trump because of pussy grabbing, when they're not dropping Hillary because of the rape victim intimidation. But lefties, this is YOUR ISSUE. As a right winger, I'm already an evil sexist. So how is this argument possibly persuasive? Trump is SO EVIL because he admits that women will let stars grab their pussies that I must abandon my policy goals (the wall, law & order, deporting illegals, killing the TPP, etc)...and then vote for Hillary? Who threatens her husband's rape victims? How is that better?

      I don't care about wymynz rights crap. They do! If Hillary threatening rape victims isn't bad enough to get them to drop their politics, why on earth should Trump being a pussy hound be bad enough for me to drop mine?

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    17. Re:Minefield by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      I think Hitler made it pretty damn clear how he felt about the Jews. I don't recall him ever hugging Jews on stage, kissing Jew babies, or having pictures of him disseminated eating matzo balls with the caption "I love Jews!" and telling everyone how he just had a problem with illegal Jews but loved legal Jews and the Jewish people.

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    18. Re:Minefield by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 2

      He wants to ban all Muslims from entering the US. If that's not an "agenda that is against equality", then what is?

      Indiscriminately bombing and burning hundreds of Islamic men, women, and children alive?

      Oh, but we've already been at war with Eastasia, right?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    19. Re:Minefield by meta-monkey · · Score: 2

      Who gives a fuck about any of this shit? Trump's insensitive. Hillary's never met a war she doesn't LOVE. Not just like. LOVE. I don't think there has ever been a more bloodthirsty politician than Hillary Clinton. In Syria alone she's got 400k dead. Migrant crisis that's destabilizing all of Europe. Make her president and we'll get a few million more slaughtered in pursuit of some geopolitical scheme for cash or another, but hey, at least she won't have said mean things (in public).

      --
      We don't have a state-run media we have a media-run state.
    20. Re:Minefield by NatasRevol · · Score: 2

      I guess we'll see in December when it goes to trial.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    21. Re:Minefield by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 2

      Using "globalist" as an insult is pretty well indicative of xenophobia.

      --
      Imagine all the people...
    22. Re:Minefield by Jzanu · · Score: 2

      Personal choice is the counter to corporate political activity including campaign contributions and advocacy. Consumers are free to spend their money anywhere.

    23. Re:Minefield by s.petry · · Score: 2

      I would normally tell you to read transcripts and watch tapes. Since time is rather short and there is much to learn, let me point you to a Philosophy show who also dabbles in the journalism so lacking in media today.

      Just a word of caution: Since the media is so biased it may seem shocking to the system to get a different view. Taking the red pill as it were. Always, check sources if you are in doubt. Stefan provides them all, but may be found easier on his web site compared to Youtube.

      --

      -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    24. Re: Minefield by myid · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Yes, Hillary and Obama voted for the "Secure Fence Act of 2006". See this list of who voted for it. Barack Obama, Joe Biden, and Hillary Clinton all voted for it.

      Also, Mrs. Clinton gave a speech to the Council on Foreign Relations on October 31, 2016. A transcript of the speech, and Q&A after the speech, are here. (You can do a search on that web page for the word "Mexico".)

      A video of part of the speech is here. From 2:17 to 2:29: "What we need to simultaneously - you know, secure our borders with technology, personnel, physical barriers if necessary in some places - and we need to have tougher employer sanctions ..."

    25. Re:Minefield by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      We need diversity of opinions in this country. We need diversity of opinions in tech. We need diversity of opinions everywhere. While I dislike Trump and can't really view what he says as "opinions" but rather as verbal hiccups, we're stuck in a difficult political decision trying to figure out who the lesser evil is and quite a lot of your family, friends, and neighbors will be choosing someone other than your preference. This does not mean that they're morons or evil.

      Think about the long term. If it's ok today in a liberal community to silence and stifle conservative views, then does that means it's ok for conservative communities to silence and stifle liberal views? We already have a legislature that doesn't understand this, they naively assume they have a permanent majority and try to change the rules to suit themselves only to find that these rules backfire when a different party gets the power. Remember how the ugly nomination process of Robert Bork completely changed every nomination since then and turned them into side shows and opportunities for grand standing, but both parties.

      If you want your view to be heard then you need to allow the ugly views to be heard as well.

      If anyone is taking all of this politics stuff seriously they need to step back and take a deep breath, maybe pet a cat, or dog if they're a dog person, or a snake if they're a snake person. We've survived worse than whatever candidate you dislike the most.

    26. Re:Minefield by Raenex · · Score: 2

      You fucking asshole. What's under contention: "against racial or gender equality"

      What you said: "He wants to ban all Muslims from entering the US. If that's not an "agenda that is against equality", then what is?"

      Islam is not a race or a gender. It's a dangerous political ideology founded by a conquering warlord that does not share Western values. It's the most militant religion on the planet that's stated goals are to subjugate the rest of the world to Islam.

      And the stupidest thing about you useful idiots? It's the most backwards ideology when it comes to gender equality in the world today.

    27. Re:Minefield by serviscope_minor · · Score: 2

      You mean Trump likes the ladies? Is that forbidden now?

      Again, are you being wilfully obtuse?

      Tell me, do you like the ladies? I'm going to assume yes.

      Would you bust into a changing room just to get an eyeful, even if you knew you wouldn't be arrested?

      Would you find a lady you liked and just start forcing kisses on her?

      Would you grab someone by the pussy merely because they let you (e.g. because you could ruin their career if they didn't[*])?

      Because I, and many of my friends, as you put it "like the ladies", and none of us would do any of tose things because we're not raging arseholes.

      [*] I wonder if you're going to complain about that clause. Before you do, I'd like you to think very hard about how a big, famous celebrity and an aspiring unknown might interact and the relative power imbalance, even if no threats are made.

      --
      SJW n. One who posts facts.
    28. Re: Minefield by Talderas · · Score: 2

      That would be a business case for diversity but the people that typically champion diversity aren't doing so based on the business case for it. They do so based on demographics and quotas.

      --
      "Lack of speed can be overcome. In the worst case by patience." --Znork
    29. Re:Minefield by Triklyn · · Score: 2

      "Has your dad ever bought a Jaffa orange?... Right, he’s buying nukes for Israel, bro. He’s a Jew."

      i highly recommend Four Lions.

      great movie.

    30. Re:Minefield by ncc74656 · · Score: 2

      It's weird. I remember when a sitting president was sued for sexual assault, and at the time Democrats didn't seem to find the allegations credible. Nor the rape allegations. Well, I'm sure they had their reasons beyond just, you know, rank hypocrisy.

      If Democrats didn't have double standards, they'd have no standards at all. :-P

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    31. Re:Minefield by Raenex · · Score: 2

      Islam is a religion.

      It's also a political ideology that seeks to impose its values on others.

      but the Muslims I've known are quite reasonable and hardly ever go on jihaidic shooting sprees

      Sure, there are plenty of moderate Muslims. But even then a large number of them do not share Western values.

      Most Muslims, like most Christians and most Buddhists, want to live their own reasonably peaceful lives.

      Islam at its core is an expansionist and violent religion, unlike Buddhism, and unlike the actual gospels of Christianity (even if there was a period of authoritarian theocracy). That's why Islam has bloody borders.

      They may provide political support for things I find despicable, but that's not a serious problem, given the numbers that are fleeing to the West.

      Given all the problems caused by just a tiny percentage, why do you think it's a good idea to increase it? Islam is a fundamental threat to the West.

  2. Thanks, asshole by paiute · · Score: 2

    Those who have forgotten the origin story of Facebook had also forgotten that you are a self-centered prick with no morals. Thanks for hitting refresh on that turd icon.

    --
    If Slashdot were chemistry it would look like this:Cadaverine
  3. Re:Fair point by cayenne8 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Fair point. There's total and utter stupidity too.

    You might also consider it the support of the lesser or the two evils being presented to us this time around.

    Many are likely voting one way or the other on the potential for the Supreme Court balance alone. That's actually my main issue now, along with gun rights.

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  4. Propaganda by s.petry · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Apologize while bashing the hell out of the Political Candidate you dislike. The propaganda is so thick you can taste it.

    So can Facebook say "Thanks" to Mark followed by "On behalf of the Corrupt politician, corrupt political party, and corrupt media trying to install her we give our thanks!"

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  5. What would Michelle Obama say by tomhath · · Score: 2

    After her speech, I have to wonder how she would react if her husband was caught getting a blowjob in the Oval Office from a girl about the age of Michelle's daughter. She seems to think it's okay for Hillary to ignore it.

  6. two bad choices by ooloorie · · Score: 3, Informative

    his support for an erratic, racist demagogue has outraged many of their employees and partners

    So, support for a corrupt, lying manipulator shouldn't be cause for outrage? Because that's the only realistic alternative in this election. We have two horrible candidates running. If you don't see that and hurl epithets at people who make a different choice from you, the problem is with you.

  7. But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? by mi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "We can't create a culture that says it cares about diversity and then excludes almost half the country because they back a political candidate,"

    When Brendan Eich was ousted from Mozilla, it was for his private backing of California Proposition 8, which won the backing of over 52% of California voters. By the hateful logic of Mr. Eich's detractors, the entire State of California should've been boycotted by the freedom-loving web-sites until the State purged their thought-criminals.

    Where Mr. Zuckerberg stood on that boycott is unclear, but the words he is preaching now, should've been uttered then.

    --
    In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
    1. Re:But it was Ok to ban most of California voters? by david_thornley · · Score: 2

      Eich publicly supported Proposition 8, and donated a large sum of money, all to deny certain people the right to marry the ones they loved. He was a bad cultural fit for Mozilla.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
  8. Great Point! Evidence lacking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Trump was labeled anti-Hispanic because he wants to close the border with Mexico and correct the illegal immigration issue (uh oh, I used the bad phrase). He discussed the issues of bringing in even more immigrants and refugees from the Middle East which got him labeled Islamophobic and xenophobic. He talked about Obama's birth certificate which somehow landed him as a racist but ignores the Hillary camp who ran the same story before Trump. Hillary still hangs out with Bloomenthal so he has to be an open racist.

    The woman thing is a bit more complex because Trump has high beauty standards, says so, and was a Celebrity in a position where lots of offers came his way, and had an interesting audio leak(1). Sorry kids, but some women know that sex appeal is a way of getting ahead in the world and are not afraid to use it. I think that makes him a bit shallow, but not different than most men who have beauty standards too. They just happen to be less vocal about it and lack the soap box.

    (1) Audio starts with him telling Bush that he tried hard to get with someone and was turned down. That is not sexual assault, that's called dating. We know that this happened in the past because he says "now she has those fake boobs and such". Middle of the audio is talking about a particular type of woman, so stop the crap generalizations. If you have not at least heard people talk about legs, butts, boobs, bulges, etc.. and you are past puberty you are 100% hearing impaired. I'll bet that you actually talked about those things more than once when you thought you were in close company. The end of the audio and video, Trump comes out and is a complete gentlemen. Bush tells HER to give HIM a hug, and within 2 seconds Trump volunteered to her that he was spoken for. That is not a sexual predator.

    The whole narrative at this point is contrived and abused to point of being senseless. I got bored listening to speeches and reading transcripts to disprove the media narrative so now I get maybe 1 in 3. The media keeps rehashing the few "Gotcha" lines they caught weeks and months ago as if that was all Trump said. It's crap, not journalism.

    Posting anonymously because the Leftist's aversion to people reading the truth will get this moderated to hell in short order. Stefan Molyneux has a great series called the Truth about Trump which breaks down all of these facts and more regarding the narrative of the left to install a candidate.

  9. Re:Of course you can. And you should. by jedidiah · · Score: 3, Insightful

    > Of course we can create a culture that excludes people based on their support of a political candidate.

    The founding fathers are all rolling in their graves right now.

    This bullshit is pure Hilter and pure Stalin. Trump has nothing on you people.

    --
    A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
  10. Everybody needs shoes by PraiseBob · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Michael Jordan once said, "Republicans buy shoes too." He has political views, but didn't want his brand associated with only 50% of shoppers. Some companies want to be part of culture wars. Chick-fil-a doesnt believe in equal rights for gays, Target makes a big deal about letting transgender people pee. That's part of their image and identity that they want their brand to be. Shoppers can make their own choices.

    FB seems to be going a third way, and supporting both candidates, which in turn pisses off both sides. So the angry people can then... post rants on Facebook which generates hits and more traffic from political discussions, and more ad revenue. Ah, clever...

  11. Diversity Bullshit by sycodon · · Score: 5, Informative

    It is clear that the SJWs only believe in one kind of Diversity...of Race

    They are not interested in Diversity of Opinion
    They are not interested in Diversity of Thought
    They are not interested in the Diversity of Goals

    If you think differently than them, have different opinions, or don't share their SJW goals, you are Other and are to be despised.

    Don't bother arguing otherwise.

    Radio host Marshall Gilbert was fired for voting for Prop 8

    A coffee shop, El Coyote, became a target of protest after the manager’s name was put on a blacklist for giving $100 to support Proposition 8. Mobs of protesters harassed El Coyote’s customers, shouting “shame on you,” until police in riot gear settled the crowd.

    Mozilla CEO Brendan Eich

    Google for more.

    --
    When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    1. Re:Diversity Bullshit by Chas · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Jeeze. Try learning to read.

      Nobody SAID it was the government.

      But the modern SJW "culture" has become deeply and pervasively TOXIC.

      Now, it's not just enough to disagree with them or even ridicule them.

      No, they must be DESPISED. then disenfranchised and ultimately destroyed. By any means necessary.
      This isn't just "voting with your dollars" and "refusing the patronize". This is ACTIVELY trying to damage a business by harassing its customers and physically interfering with people trying to do business with them.

      Why? Because they're trying to sell a narrative that WORDS are the equivalent of VIOLENCE. Thus, they can feel justified using REAL violence in response to "wrong" opinions.

      I'm sorry, that shit just AIN'T okay!

      If you don't like what someone has to say, fine. Debate them.
      Don't want to debate them? Ignore them. Don't patronize where they work.

      But going out of your way to destroy someone's life? How fucking petty and pathetic is that?

      --


      Chas - The one, the only.
      THANK GOD!!!
    2. Re:Diversity Bullshit by Jzanu · · Score: 2

      You illiterate faggot try to read the god damn thread.

    3. Re:Diversity Bullshit by elrous0 · · Score: 2

      It is clear that the SJWs only believe in one kind of Diversity...of Race

      They're not even interested in diversity of race. Do you honestly think that SJW's are going to push for more "diversity" at black-owned companies that only hire black people? Methinks the Cubs will win the World Series before that ever happens.

      --
      SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
  12. Agreed. Personally, liberal condescension offends by raymorris · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In my opinion, Trump is a loudmouth not unlike Howard Stern, and definitely should not be president. When it comes to RACIST remarks, these are some of the comments I've come across:
    Calling employees "n*gger" (Hillary)
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

    Calling people "f*cking Jew bastard" (Hillary, confirmed by three witnesses)
    https://www.theguardian.com/wo...

    Hillary said publicly that her mentor is Robert Byrd, former KKK leader.

    That idiot trump *has* talked about building a wall; Hillary actually voted to do so.

    What bothers me much, much more, though, is the condescension of Hillary and friends towards my family. It *really* bothers me that they tell my daughter, in effect, "we'll give you an extra ten points on this test since you're black, and obviously black people like you are too stupid to actually learn the material like we white people can do". The hidden, implied racism and bigotry that runs deep in all of their policies is infuriating to me. When my daughter hears Hillary call someone a "n*gger" or a "f*cking Jew bastard", I explain to my daughter that Hillary is wrong, very wrong. Some people are stupid and say stupid things; that's simple enough to understand and accept. But when the entire school system, through college, is predicated on the assumption that my daughters complexion makes her less capable, it's harder to convincingly explain that EVERYONE setting school policy are ALL morons. I'm sure she will at times wonder if they are right; and that saddens and angers me tremendously.

  13. PS "grep | wc" says Dems 25X more racist by raymorris · · Score: 2

    On a separate but related note, although the liberals' implied, assumed racism in most of their policies is the most infuriating to me, there's another kind that also bugs me greatly, one that is easy to quantify objectively and see the difference.

    In my opinion, the constant focus on race and gender is stupid and highly counter-productive. I think we should be talking about the QUALIFICATIONS of Supreme Court nominees, not going on and on about where their great-great-grandfather was born, nor the contents of their underwear. I raise my daughter to see individual people for who they are, not to start by categorizing them as black, latino, white, male and female. 99% of the time, those categories are completely irrelevant to the topic at hand. So I think we should cut back about 99% on how much time we spend categorizing people like that; don't teach the next generation to be always looking at race and gender, all the time. On that note:

    About 18 months ago I grabbed a random sampling of 8 Democrat speeches and about 8 Republican speeches. Democrats brought up race 26 times more often than Republicans.

    1. Re: PS "grep | wc" says Dems 25X more racist by raymorris · · Score: 3, Insightful

      > > In my opinion, the constant focus on race and gender is stupid and highly counter-productive. I think we should be talking about the QUALIFICATIONS of Supreme Court nominees, not going on and on about where their great-great-grandfather was born, nor the contents of their underwear.

      > Let me introduce you to Merrick Garland.

      Sure, let's talk about Merrick Garland. Judicial experts considered him to be one of the most qualified candidates in 2009. Clinton chose a less-qualified candidate with a vagina and darker skin.

      In 2010, there was another vacancy. Commentators again pointed to Garland. Obama appointed a less-qualified person with a vagina and darker skin.

      In 2016, with no more political elections ahead of him, Obama nominated Garland. Certain Republicans decided they'd rather a 50%-50% chance of getting a justice who follows the Constitution as written, appointed by the next president. They think Merrick Garland's type of judicial reasoning is fundamentally wrong. Liberals, on the other hand, criticized the pick why? Because of his lack of experience? No, he had experience. They complained that Obama should have picked someone with a darker complexion.

  14. He does not by melted · · Score: 5, Informative

    >> He wants to ban all Muslims from entering the US.

    Will you stop spreading this tired bit of propaganda? He merely wants to stop the flow of people from Muslim countries _with may of which we're de-facto at war_, and then only until appropriate vetting procedures are established. This never was about a blanket "Muslim" ban.

    Can you guys and galls get it through your thick skulls that letting in military-age men of an uncertain background from the countries where radical Islam is a dominant ideology is an absolutely idiotic thing to do? What's so bad about figuring out how to make sure you're not letting in an ISIS or Al Quaeda operative?

    1. Re:He does not by PatientZero · · Score: 4, Informative

      This never was about a blanket "Muslim" ban.

      "Donald J. Trump is calling for a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what the hell is going on."

      Donald Trump

      --
      Freedom to fear. Freedom from thought. Freedom to kill.
      I guess the War on Terror really is about freedom!
  15. Re:Of course you can. And you should. by sinij · · Score: 2

    Of course we can create a culture that excludes people based on their support of a political candidate.

    Why stop there? Put them into camps and start gassing them already. This should quickly correct all these wrong-thinking people and would allow inclusive, tolerant, and democratic society to finally flourish.

  16. Re:Fair point by ScentCone · · Score: 2

    Yes indeed.

    I just drove through Michigan - from its touristy border with Canada, down through the rural spaces, through Ann Arbor and around Detroit and off into NY and PA, down through western MD and into the DC burbs. I saw less than 10 "Clinton" signs in front yards, and never one on display at a business. I saw hundreds and hundreds of Trump signs ... and not on run down shacks and pickup trucks. I saw them prominently displayed in front of large businesses, busy restaurants, and homes of all sizes and values. In the DC area, I see almost none of the usual liberal sign-posting, except for local races and congressional seats, etc.

    The Trump support (or Hillary revulsion, as much or more likely) was strikingly strong through a thousand miles of rural, suburban, and city driving. Doesn't mean that visible support for him, or silence for Hillary, will map to meaningful votes or electoral seats - but the notion, as constantly beaten on by the lefty media, that it's all simpleton rednecks supporting Trump because they all want to be Nazis and bring back the good old days of slave owning ... it's complete BS.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  17. Re:Fair point by ScentCone · · Score: 2

    What whacky scenario do you see playing out where all the guns are taken from you?

    You mean, like Australia? That sort of thing? Or Hillary Clinton's personal favorite back-channel methods: she wants to support punitive taxes on the purchase of ammunition, and make gun manufacturers vulnerable to lawsuits over deaths committed by criminals using their products. In other words, she wants to use executive power to strangle gun makers and owners through regulatory and financial attacks, and get that bit of misery in place while she seats Supreme Court justices that will, as she puts it, "reinterpret the constitution." She's on the record saying that she doesn't believe the 2nd Amendment protects the individual right to own guns. If she can stuff the court with activists who will follow her lead on that, that's exactly the approach to an Australia-style confiscation of privately owned guns.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
  18. Re:Fair point by cayenne8 · · Score: 2

    As a Non-American I find this fixation with guns absurd.

    I was going to answer, but I see the ScentCone has beat me to most of my valid points, especially about the Oz example.

    So, yes, I fear for my existing gun freedoms.

    And as that you are a non-American, it shouldn't really matter one way or another to you, should it?

    It's nice that you're interested, but you really needn't bless us with your 'superior' and more 'civilized' outlook on weapons where you live. If you don't like to have full freedoms like we have here (guns being one of them) then fine, stay where you are, but don't moralize or try to talk down how we have things here.

    None of your business....

    --
    Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
  19. SMH by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2

    Looking at all the "5, Insightful" comments - did I miss something? Has /. been taken over by 4chan redpillers lately?