Social WR Lounge v249: I always forget what WPEM means.

[My Spot]

Why do you think they happen so much?

Gotta try and balance out offender rates somehow.

 

[Arashikage4Life]

Why do a lot of the War Room chuds have the "old man Frank Mir bobbing head" avatar? A sign of unity?

 

[HomeCheese]

Ultrasounds showed enlarged and darkened lymph nodes in his stomach and large and darkened masses on his liver.

The non-surgical biopsy didn't show anything, but it wouldn't unless it was active large cell lymphoma. Which is why I resisted, because I know it's not active large cell lymphoma or else he'd be dead for how fucking long I've had to wait to see a vet specialist. But the vet still worries that it could be emergent large cell lymphoma or small cell lymphoma (the latter being what I suspected all along from my own research).

Sooo hard to have a sick pet, no one wants their little pal to suffer. Good luck! Cats are greats pets BTW so good for you to give into to their awesomeness.

 

[essie]

Q into the storm got pretty good towards the end.

Although frustrating, especially all the bs about defending free speech.

 

[HomeCheese]

As an official representative of toxic masculinity there is nothing wrong with being emotional over the thought of losing a pet.

Fred Van Fleet: Even thugs cry.

 

[My Spot]

@Sketch You’d think a supposed big shot lawyer could afford $20 a month for cat insurance. Hmm...

 

[essie]

@Trotsky im sorry to read about your cat. I don’t have any advice just hope things work out best as possible.

 

[tonni]

Haha. Looks like @Falsedawn ran to the mods right his running to The Lounge didn't pay off.

Well worth the dubs.

What did you say?

 

[tonni]

Ultrasounds showed enlarged and darkened lymph nodes in his stomach and large and darkened masses on his liver.

The non-surgical biopsy didn't show anything, but it wouldn't unless it was active large cell lymphoma. Which is why I resisted, because I know it's not active large cell lymphoma or else he'd be dead for how fucking long I've had to wait to see a vet specialist. But the vet still worries that it could be emergent large cell lymphoma or small cell lymphoma (the latter being what I suspected all along from my own research).

That sucks I hope your cat heals

 

[irish_thug]

Why do a lot of the War Room chuds have the "old man Frank Mir bobbing head" avatar? A sign of unity?

Sign of respect for the passing of @bigwaverider's father

 

[Confucamus]

Define "so much".

You notice the ones that do happen because of confirmation bias. If I cared enough, I could respond to those at a 10:1 clip without trying.

We've seen a pretty dramatic rise in fake hate crimes in the past few years and that's only the ones that make the news.

The better question is why there's such a fixation on fake hate crimes when the complete number of the fake ones that have had public commentary pale in comparison to the sheer volume of confirmed ones year over year.

That's not a better question, it's a distraction. There's a fixation on fake hate crimes because they tend to disprove the popular narrative that America is a racist nation front to back. You can continue spewing the same line about there's more real hate crimes than fake. I don't think anybody doubts this. Tough to tell which of those are fake hate crimes that the person got away with as well, though. But that's another discussion.
But as for each individual who creates fake hate crimes, the supply most certainly does not meet the needs apparently, or they wouldn't do it. They see how much attention and fame that victims of hate crimes get, they want that too. Only they don't experience enough racism to warrant attention. Then they create it. They want in on that treehouse club. They tend to not care how their fake claims damage the likelihood of credible claims to be believed.

 

[Falsedawn]

We've seen a pretty dramatic rise in fake hate crimes in the past few years and that's only the ones that make the news.



That's not a better question, it's a distraction. There's a fixation on fake hate crimes because they tend to disprove the popular narrative that America is a racist nation front to back. You can continue spewing the same line about there's more real hate crimes than fake. I don't think anybody doubts this. Tough to tell which of those are fake hate crimes that the person got away with as well, though. But that's another discussion.
But as for each individual who creates fake hate crimes, the supply most certainly does not meet the needs apparently, or they wouldn't do it. They see how much attention and fame that victims of hate crimes get, they want that too. Only they don't experience enough racism to warrant attention. Then they create it. They want in on that treehouse club. They tend to not care how their fake claims damage the likelihood of credible claims to be believed.

If you're going to debate the number of hate crimes, you're gonna have to take it up with the FBI because they're the ones confirming and noting them. And much like police shootings, they're self reported, which means that there's a very high likelihood if them being UNDERreported, not overreported.

This is why confirmation bias is the primary driver of this discussion. You've already made up in your mind that "America isn't a racist country front to back" and are trying to hinge on every bit of information that supports that. Only problem is that that's not the argument being made and there's significantly more evidence disproving you than proving it. Ignoring that in favor of your own beliefs as to "how things are" isn't a logical discernment, it's an emotional one. Which is fine, but you shouldn't be surprised when someone logically dismisses it without providing any further evidence. Because it's not evidence that's driving your conclusion.

 

[Cubo de Sangre]

But as for each individual who creates fake hate crimes, the supply most certainly does not meet the needs apparently, or they wouldn't do it.

Or perhaps their supply is of insufficient quality?

 

[Denter]

The rush by American conservatives to side with Putin over Merkel is really a pretty succinct statement of their priorities and the complete irrelevance of non-ethnic/racial ideology.

On one side, you have the most powerful and successful Western conservative leader in modern history, a self-made woman from humble beginnings, and a committed ally to the US for decades. On the other side, you have a former communist officer and ultra-corrupt gatekeeper of oligarchy who has dedicated himself to destroying the United States and NATO and who has subverted Russian democracy and woefully mismanaged the Russian economy.

But one gave refuge to brown people and the other didn't. So the lines are so drawn.

To be fair, the Russian economy in 1999 couldn't possibly get any worse- Putin did preside over a significant recovery, but I have no idea how much credit he actually deserves. There were obviously ups and downs involved, but Russia is better off today than it was 20 years ago.

 

[Falsedawn]

To be fair, the Russian economy in 1999 couldn't possibly get any worse- Putin did preside over a significant recovery, but I have no idea how much credit he actually deserves. There were obviously ups and downs involved, but Russia is better off today than it was 20 years ago.

That along with the public perceptions of Yeltsin as a drunkard and US stooge.

Which isn't too far off, but still.

 

[Gregolian]

That along with the public perceptions of Yeltsin as a drunkard and US stooge.

Which isn't too far off, but still.

Isn't too far off?

IT'S FUCKING BANG ON! At the end he was suggesting paying Russian government officials with fucking vodka.

 

[Denter]

That along with the public perceptions of Yeltsin as a drunkard and US stooge.

Which isn't too far off, but still.

I seem to recall a Time magazine story on this.

 

[Falsedawn]

Isn't too far off?

IT'S FUCKING BANG ON! At the end he was suggesting paying Russian government officials with fucking vodka.

Now remember Greg, No English.

 

[Gregolian]

Now remember Greg, No English.

 

[Confucamus]

If you're going to debate the number of hate crimes, you're gonna have to take it up with the FBI because they're the ones confirming and noting them. And much like police shootings, they're self reported, which means that there's a very high likelihood if them being UNDERreported, not overreported.

I’m not debating the number of hate crimes. I already said that. You’re trying to distract and control the conversation.

This is why confirmation bias is the primary driver of this discussion.

Not for me it’s not. You, however, can’t even answer why they happen so much. You’d rather debate whether it’s “too much” or not. Or you’d rather concentrate on this “fixation” that doesn’t seem to exist.

You've already made up in your mind that "America isn't a racist country front to back" and are trying to hinge on every bit of information that supports that.

No, we’re talking about fake hate crimes here and you won’t confront any part of it.

Only problem is that that's not the argument being made and there's significantly more evidence disproving you than proving it.
Ignoring that in favor of your own beliefs as to "how things are" isn't a logical discernment, it's an emotional one. Which is fine, but you shouldn't be surprised when someone logically dismisses it without providing any further evidence. Because it's not evidence that's driving your conclusion.

So instead of confronting an issue, you’d rather assign devious motives to the other person, treat them as fact, and dismiss the conversation. This type of fear only helps issues grow. You may not like that fake hate crimes happen or that they’re reported on, but they are real.
I’ll try this again, why do you think fake hate crimes happen? If it’s not for attention or fame, then why? If there’s so much racism everywhere, why do they happen so much?

Or perhaps their supply is of insufficient quality?

Could be.