: aware of and actively attentive to important societal facts and issues (especially issues of racial and social justice)
So when we say "STOP WOKE" you're actually saying, be less attentive to important societal facts and issues. I will give the right wing some credit, they do messaging better than anybody.
I have to think that this paragraph is horribly misstated:
DeSantis also has championed Florida’s so-called “Stop WOKE” law, which bars businesses, colleges and K-12 schools from giving training on certain racial concepts, such as the theory that people of a particular race are inherently racist, privileged or oppressed. A federal judge last November blocked the law’s enforcement in colleges, universities and businesses, calling it “positively dystopian.” (My bold.)
"Inherently" connotes that "people of a particular race are ... racist, privileged or oppressed" purely by their nature as being of the specified race, which is obviously completely fucking wrong. The truth is that "people of a particular race" are "privileged or oppressed" to some degree because they exist as a particular race within a social/cultural/economic system which privileges or oppresses them based on race. Note that I did not include "racist" as a quality in my corrective statement. It's true that a social/cultural/economic system can increase the likelihood that an individual within it would be racist, due to pressures applied to people within such a system, but it would be wrong to make a blanket statement that all people of a particular race "are racist."
I don't know what Disney's thinking and it's not like I'm a fan or anything, but if I was a multi-billion dollar global media powerhouse with more reach than any other single entity, and I was getting my ankles bitten, and my friends rights' taken, by some ridiculous fascist pinhead I would drown them in lawsuits so fast it'd make their pudding cups spin.
Not just one big suit, mind you, I'd bankroll every unfair practices suit my people had and make a point to target Ron's personal businesses. Thousands of suits all churning through Mickey & Co., Because this is straight up no fooling bullshit and if the courts can't figure it out we move on to step two. Step two is outside the legal frameworks.
Disney should get their Imagineers working on a way to just move Disney World somewhere that won’t be under water in a couple decades. Just pick the whole thing up and plop it somewhere better
Paxton’s career will be lost to history because of the gravity of the moments around him being heavier, but he is truly a special kind of monster. May he reap every single ounce of what he sowed.
He was missing a mud flap. Certainly pulling guns and releasing dogs was required. Couldn’t they just send his employer a ticket or call that “how’s my driving?” number on the truck?
Even if it was a known murderer, there is zero practical reason to engage in a projected car chase.
Not to mention, why do we need armed militia to enforce traffic laws? you know, the thing that usually has a maximum penalty in the hundreds of dollars? These aren't even real crimes! Somehow we figured out that parking meters don't need guns or tasers, but why did we stop there?
They are also worse than random chance at actually doing the one thing police claim technology can't match: drug and bomb sniffing. Dogs just want to go take a nap or get a treat, and their handlers are cops who just think everything is suspicious so of course they get lots of "hits".
It's essentially the same bullshit that hoodwinked the world with Coco the "signing" guerilla for a couple of decades.
The fact that handlers can fake a "hit" wherever and whenever they want is the entire point, and also the reason they resist moving over to technical solutions. Those technologies also come with logging, which is another point against them as far as cops are concerned.
They’re still around to use as bullshit “probable cause” to hassle and search people’s cars for drugs. Because the war on drugs was a good idea, and dogs have not repeatedly been shown to be complete bullshit. They indicate when their handler wants them to. It’s been proven so many times. Yet, it’s probable cause.
It's not clear if the officer responsible for directing the dog to attack Rose is facing any disciplinary action.
Of course not, any disciplinary action will wait until the department's PR department has established whether or not there is a significant media backlash. Bad publicity (potentially spurring ethical reform) is the only reason a cop ever gets disciplined, after all.
A few years back there was a scandal where a whole chain of mental health facilities was doing this. They would buy local mental hospitals, not change the name of disclose that they’d been bought, and start committing everyone, no matter what, for exactly as long as their insurance would cover, then kicking them to the streets.
Took me a bit to dig up the story – it was these guys:
nbcnews.com
Hot