All Activity

Yes that is as it should be.....but in real world practice it is not so cut and dry Laws Stem from Policies...In other words Policies formulate Laws.. Policies are piable so long as the goal that it intends to meet is still being met... Laws are more stringent.....hence the relatively high bar to prove they have been broken The Government usually is either made of of business interest or serve their puropses I have no argument with that.... Was the Vietnam war Officially Approved By Congress? They used semantics of Police Action or Armed Conflict.....its all Polytricks True.... This is usually because their are factions in Governement with Greater agendas at play fair e Cool Aren't we all physically limited to some extent in some ways? What if Mom says....otherwise? Which is the case with the fed and state over cannabis....as you mentioned. True... True When it comes to games.....the cardinal rule is to - Win True....

Of course, I'm not surprised by your opinion/position. However, let it also be stated that English is the most spoken language in the world. That is not a lie or false praise or misrepresentation. It is a fact. English is the language that allows us to communicate on this forum.

Of the quote from Profd , I want it publicly said, I concur Webster did something. The rest of what Profd said I struck through as a lie or false praise or a misrepresentation of communal action.

So many. The 1985 super bowl shuffle video, of course. And this season, all of the last minute come-from-behind victories orchestrated by the "ice man" QB Caleb Williams. Those thrilling moments were like something out of a movie. Unreal! We were on our way to another one of these miracles this past Sunday - but no such luck...

Noah Webster did something i.e. fufilled a need. He codified the meaning of words. Black folks are free to do the same thing if they want to preserve gullah, patois, ebonics or any other language & words.

I HOPE you're not implying what I THINK you're implying.

@aka Contrarian what is your favorite memory involving in any way, the chicago bears?

@aka Contrarian no I don't want to solve all the problems in the world. first, because some problems can't be solved, they have to be lived through. They have to be given their time, even in full gruesomeness. I learned that a relative long time ago. second, because I know exactly what I want, and comprehend the prosequences plus consequences of any action. I was fortunate enough to have the time and space to learn that, and what I want isn't what you say I want. I don't want to know all, oomiscient, or have all power, omnipotent. first, because either is impossible. To know all you have to know not merely about all today, but all yesterdays and all tomorrows... for any finite being, that is impossible. And you can never have all the power unless you can become all, and no finite being can become all. My rearing by my parents taught me that as a child. I do enjoy communicating and learning through communication. And I was taught as a child to always expand my knowledge as much as I can. Limiting the value of nothing. Thank you for the luck:)

@aka Contrarian It is rare i do the following but I will paraphrase the white enslavers commonly called the founding fathers, concerning the peoples use of things: the people are stupid. Yeah black slang and ebonics while black people let the gullah dialect become endangered, the patios of new orleans be the same. Black people emphasize slangs we made, which are very figurative over , literally more potent forms like the gullah dialect or the patois of new orleans or florida. It is a taste thing, admittedly. Well, what word would I replace perfect with in the following phrase you wrote "In a perfect world, as the adjective "perfect" suggests, there are no problems. Life is ideal." I would replace two words: a and perfect and make adjustments to the following "In my ideal world, no problems exist" In a world I have an idea to no problems exist. Perfect meant a total work. As the zen say, it is the sunny side of the hill side the shady side of the hill. Problems must be in the world for it to be total. Yes, oonmoptopia I spelled it wrong. It's funny when webster was a boy, in england, people couldn't comprehend each other in various regions of england because their diction was so various. This was the same in france or germany. Meaning when webster was a boy there wasn't popular usage of words in england. every single region spoke differently in england, often incomprehensibel to each other. He comes up with this idea of a "standard" book of rules of words and speech for the english language. a dictionary for english. Dictionaries are as old as the royal bloodline of the nile, but never before were they advertised as a standard. And then with the advent of public school which wasn't common either in humanity. School historically was something paid for by individuals, it wasn't for the public , it wasn't for all. but with the idea of the public school plus dictionaries came what you call, very correctly, the popular majority usage of certain words certain ways as de facto official. Webster himself, made up words:) but post webster, now we have popular usage. So, yes I don't feel obliged to adhere to webster. But I want to defend my individualism, I am not looking for a flock. I simply admit myself. The popular usage will remain, will be adhered, but I don't care if I am alone with 999,999 other people I will be my way.

@richardmurrayI am not so inclined to dismiss popular usage. Language is fluid. Nothing illustrates this more than black slang and Ebonics. If you had your way, what word would you replace "perfect" with? Or are you of the opinion that any such state as perfection exists? Your sentiments in regard to Webster would explain your tendency to make up words.

@aka Contrarian I know of it, I have always felt the heritage webster started in the anglophone and unstraightly all humanity was an error. His implementation of a book of speaking based on figurative definitions was the beginning of a literal horror show in linguistics, cause now throughout humanity, most, an overhwhelming most, preference to the idea f figurative definition which only harms the positive quality in communication. I wish someone black with money with my thinking had been around circa 1865 in the usa cause black people in the usa had a unique opportunity to have a much wiser sense of diction but.. it wasn't meant to be. Unfortunate, I hope you feel better sooner rather than later

@ProfDYes, all things considered, it was a good run for DA BEARS. Hopefully, we can keep the momentum alive for next season and go from better to best! Thanks for keeping my spirits up all these past weeks!

@aka Contrarian....your home team, Da Bears had an excellent season. Especially compared to the past few years. 1st year Head Coach Ben Johnson deserves a lot of credit for helping QB Caleb Williams and the offense play better. HC Johnson assembled a very good coaching staff too. Defensive Coordinator Dennis Allen earned his money in his 1st year with Da Bears. I thought HC Johnson should have gone for a 2 point conversion after QB Williams threw that miraculous TD to tie the game. If the conversion was successful, Da Bears would have been in the NFC championship game. From a strategic perspective, I understand why HC Johnson played for overtime. Hindsight is always 20/15. Nonetheless, Da Bears and their fans should be very proud of the team. They have a bright future ahead.

You are much too subjective. It's always about you and your compulsion to be omniscient, and ultimately omnipotent. You obviously want to solve all the problems of the world. Good luck with that goal.

@richardmurrayI prefer the dictionary definition of the word "perfect" which you might want to check out. And I assure you that watching old reels of Walter Payton in action will not lift my spirits about yesterday's loss.

@aka Contrarian perfect comes from the latin per- meaning totally, ala perview is when something is viewed totally absent any part not viewed fect - means work. A total work has all in it. Perfect never suggest an absence. Problems are part of what makes the world whole, are part of the total world, absent problems the world can't be perfect, a total work. What you call ideal, a thing of an idea, in not perfect. It is the idea of a world without problems, that is not a perfect world, that is an ideal world, an imbalanced world. I have etymologically proven my position. I have always opposed the USA heritage derived from the english of using words figuratively. It weakens all words. We do like each other, as much as near total strangers can. We do not concur on definition. if you have a video collage of sweetness running about, give it a view and lift your spirits

@aka Contrarian Assumptions are worthless, comprehension has value and if I don't comprehend someone else I ask them, beginning with I don't know, which is wisdom. Comprehension has nothing to do with justification, a thing of justice, meaning a thing determining right or wrong. I am not thinking in terms of right or wrong. I am not asking questions of you to be right or wrong, but to comprehend. Now you may not want me to comprehend you or may think another comprehending you is unimportant, but I don't live like that so I ask, with no demands of an answer. But I will continue to ask anyone to comprehend more. all of this is under an idea, maybe, the discourse in this post is about how black people relay to each other, and it is proof, at the least, that black people in 2026 have a lot we don't comprehend about each other and more importantly, the lack of comprehension makes collective action inevitably faulty.

@richardmurrayJust go with your assumptions. Why do I have to justify my sentiments to you? All of this is hypothetical.

In a perfect world, as the adjective "perfect" suggests, there are no problems. Life is ideal. You are free to challenge that definition, but you can't prove otherwise. So, we have to agree to disagree. I am in the throes of disappointment over the CHICAGO BEARS, my favorite football team, losing a game they could've won, but for the coach calling questionable plays and the receivers either missing their assignments or dropping the passes from my "adopted" baby boy, Quarterback Caleb Williams, so I don't feel like plowing through a maze of verbiage to further debate the implications of a perfect world. I'm mentally exhausted.🫩

@aka Contrarian no, right or wrong is not knowable in this issue, but maybe functionality is. Functionality defined as the quality of results. Does thinking a perfect world mean all is good get more positive results than thinking a perfect world includes all things? Does thinking a perfect world is an unattainable environment which humans have to embrace get more positive results than defining the perfect world as the world that is absent human involvement, which imperfects the world?

@aka Contrarian I am not trying to change your mind , I am trying to comprehend from your point of view where militancy ends or begins with black people in the usa. I assume, but you haven't been exact, that a black person in the usa is militant anytime they have any action, verbal or non verbal that is aggressive, regardless of situation. If I comprehend you correctly, then Sean Bell's father is militant for speaking ill to those who murdered his son. Protestors who throw bottles in reaction to being hosed or shot at are militant. I comprehend fully that Malcolm is militant from your point of view based on how i assume you define militancy, but based on your definition, I assume, you categorize many black people as militant. I don't view malcolm,sean bell's father, protestors reacting to violent attack as militant. To me, self defense does not suggest militancy. Self defense isn't nonviolent, but it isn't militant, to me. But I want to comprehend your thinking better. As for the first question, and I speak to @ProfD I wish I knew with the population of descended of enslaved in the past or today how many in our homes have or have not schismed on the relationship on how to relate to whites, before the usa or after the usa, as the usa doesn't really matter in this issue. This issue is really about the white colonialist and their descendants and the black enslaved and their descendants. I wish I knew. IT would be very revealing. Cause, even if it is 40% or 30% that is a lot. Maybe it is 5% , tiny. I wonder when 1865 hit how was it? and it yields another question in my mind, why doesn't this question come up more? Every single black person knows personally, offline a spectrum of black people who relate differently to whites. Black comedians have a whole mountain of jokes on this topic. So why is it, black churches, black organizations, rarely speak on this? it isn't a secret. I have many questions and no way to get answers. The second question is in series to the first. I wish I knew the truth. I guess more so , you guys guess less, but what is the truth? No one will know sadly, unless someone has a time machine and a huge ledger. And of course, the problem is in the wording, what defines a schism in the home? what defines criminalization or unwritten illegalization? the details or definitions even with the same information can provide various results... I don't know. I wish I knew , cause it matters. I argue how black people relate to white people in the usa , in black peoples own communal sphere, is a big thing. And shouldn't be some private issue or some shrugged issue because it is really an all black affair. Hell, even Tyler perry has mentioned this issue a lot in his work. As to the third, at least on the issue of faith to rule of law versus function based on black history, a schism exist between you, aka contrarian and profd as members of aalbc And for me, the issue isn't about right or wrong but how important these stances are in the larger scheme of things. Black people who believe in faith in the rule of law, are willing to be harmed and abused by whites, rather than break the law. That is a big stance in our populace, arguably globally. Cause black people globally are abused by non blacks. so black people anywhere in humanity who are willing to be abused rather than break the law, can never relate to white people the same way as black people who function for self defense or revenge or vendetta [three different things but all are violent] based on black history . And as you both know I think of what to do tomorrow? I don't know how to bridge that issue. I never forget telling a friend of mine. If I was a pastor of a church and a white man entered the church I manage, I would told that white man to leave immediately, and go to st patricks church down the street, this is a black church. in the usa, White people historically or modernly can not be trusted intermingling with blacks. whites will 99% of the time harm blacks. the quantity of events where whites harmed blacks proves this more than anything. Not 100% no, not 100% but 99% yeah. Look at black towns today, black farms today, black regions in white cities today? No, do whites kill blacks and brand blacks today? no, but harm still? many times yes. Obama sang amazing grace for that church that white man murdered people in. And while I know that church is open to all phenotypes, that nonviolent openness as closing based on phenotype is a form of violence based on how nonviolence is implemented by many, that nonviolent position is what got black people killed. and, the law will not heal that, the law didn't protect those people. So how can a movement exist among black people in the usa, holistically in populace, with such a divide of way of life? I argue near impossible. The usa is full of white peoples, white people [white europeans/white asians/white latinos/white muslims/white women/white jews combined are the majority] compared to blacks. so, any plan has to consider how white people fit. and ...

Right. Medications have been available for several decades to manage and prevent both HIV and AIDS. Of course, if the drugs are not available in a country, that presents different challenges to the people.

Men too

First of all, nothing you said changed my mind about referring to Malcom as "militant". In fact, you just provided a lot of reasons to justify his being militant, a perfectly good word which you apparently consider a stigma. As for your other questions. I agree with ProfD on the first two and disagree with him on the 3rd.