[de Blasio] Living in a post-Bloomberg era

[DGuller]

Okay. I wouldn't interpret the police taking offence at something (cue Viking) de Blasio said, as de Blasio insulting them. I'm surprised you would.

The distinction eludes me.

Really?  You don't see the difference between perception of offensiveness and actual presence of offensiveness?  I never figured you to be one of those people who subscribe to "perception is reality" theory when it comes to offensive remarks.

[Razgovory]

I never thought he'd be on the same side as a Union, but our little Yi still has surprises.

[DGuller]

I never thought he'd be on the same side as a Union, but our little Yi still has surprises.

Bratton was right the first time, before he fell on his balls while trying to straddle the fence.  It's a Democrat/Republican issue first and foremost even before Garner was choked, and cop unions have always been squarely in the Republican camp.  People with authoritarian mindsets and intolerance for nuanced thinking seem to always find a comfortable place there.

What we're seeing with de Blasio is pretty much what we saw with Obama:  white Republicans utterly lost their shit even before the object of their vitriolic hatred even had a chance to earn it.

[citizen k]

People with authoritarian mindsets and intolerance for nuanced thinking seem to always find a comfortable place there.

And apparently on Languish.org. 

[Ed Anger]

 

[jimmy olsen]

A work slowdown and responding with two cars, or responding with cars is the work slowdown?

Both.  They're essentially not enforcing any minor laws, and one way they're doing it is by responding with excessive number of cars as per union instructions.  When you respond with excessive number of cars, it means that you can respond to fewer calls in an adequate manner, which means that you have to triage the calls you do respond to.

How the hell can the union get away with issuing these kinds of orders on a public safety issue?

[DGuller]

How the hell can the union get away with issuing these kinds of orders on a public safety issue?

Well, what are they going to do to it?

[dps]

I thought it was an American phrase that had made it's way over here - but apparently it's very New Labour. My understanding is that it's a problem in the public sector that the institutions often end up serving the producers (teachers, doctors, police, firemen) rather than the consumers (children, the sick, the public in general).

Careful, or DGuller will lecture you on how they should serve the government, not the general public.

And Garbon, I did say "in theory". 

How the hell can the union get away with issuing these kinds of orders on a public safety issue?

That kind of shit is what you get when you allow public employ unions. 

[jimmy olsen]

How the hell can the union get away with issuing these kinds of orders on a public safety issue?

Well, what are they going to do to it?

Fire the ring leaders.

[garbon]

And Garbon, I did say "in theory". 

I laughed as it seemed like a completely irrelevant...well I hesitate to even call it a point.

[Admiral Yi]

Right, I thought I'd missed one

Was there another one?

I don't think that qualifies as publicly insulting. If it does then we might as well just give up on the idea of public discourse because there's nothing left to say without causing offence.

If someone felt insulted by that I'd say they were a big girl's blouse and needed to stop being so bloody sensitive.

You don't find it insulting because presumably you've bought into the narrative that America's cops are engaging in arbitrary acts of violence against black men.

As a thought experiment, try to imagine this is not true.  Can you seen then how the mayor's statement can and should be perceived as an insult?

[garbon]

But it is just a true statement. I suppose one could take issue with the mayor saying it, when he did, but it seems bizarre to take an insult out of a statement about how parents worry / what they tell their non-white children.  (In fact, from re-reading the statement, he doesn't even seem to explicitly mention race in that section.)

[Sheilbh]

You don't find it insulting because presumably you've bought into the narrative that America's cops are engaging in arbitrary acts of violence against black men.

As a thought experiment, try to imagine this is not true.  Can you seen then how the mayor's statement can and should be perceived as an insult?

That's not quite my narrative. But I don't find it insulting because it's not insulting. It's a very carefully and delicately phrased statement. I can't, no matter what imaginative leap I make, see how words that vanilla could insult anyone.

[Admiral Yi]

That's not quite my narrative. But I don't find it insulting because it's not insulting. It's a very carefully and delicately phrased statement. I can't, no matter what imaginative leap I make, see how words that vanilla could insult anyone.

Tone only gets you so far Shelf.

[Sheilbh]

The tone's inoffensive. The content's inoffensive. I don't know what else there is.

If you are hyper-sensitive, looking for outrage and a reason to take offence then I think you probably could, but that's about it. In my view it's People's Daily 'hurting the feelings of the Chinese people' level sensitivity.