So, you're implying the majority of blacks dislike Republicans? Stereotype much, you bigot?

Yeah, it's not like there are any votes or anything where 90% of black people completely reject Republicans.

Oh wait...

Excuse me...Republican here...90% of my friends are black.

This is the nuclear version of "some of my best friends are black".

"ALMOST ALL OF MY FRIENDS ARE BLACK #NotAllRepublicans"

and,

"I'M DOWN WITH KANYE AND LOVE THICK BROADS TOO! AND I'M WHITE!"

Which anonymous "made a statement"?

The Brooklyn anons or the Westchester anons? Did it come straight from the president of Anonymous or maybe the board of directors? Or is it maybe THESE anons?: http://motherboard.vice.com/re...

Now you're learning of the inherent problem with anonymous, leaderless groups, cuck.

Is that all of you anons? Two?

Pitiful.

So you're absolutely right, better to ask what is proper etiquette WITH ANY CULTURE

If you live in the US and are an executive with a multinational corporation, and you still have to ask what is proper etiquette in dealing with a highly educated and well-traveled black man, you are either 1) clueless , 2) a Republican or 3) a racist.

Believe it or not, you'll never go wrong by just treating American people as people, regardless of their skin color. It works surprisingly well. On the off-chance that I encounter a black person, living as I do on the near West Side of Chicago, it usually turns out that they're generally regular people who laugh at funny sitcoms, enjoy well-made movies and good food and think the Bears should fire their entire coaching staff.

In the end of the movie Kim Jung-un turns out to be a pretty fun guy (aside from the debauchery and keeping the population in slavery and all

Hey, nobody's perfect.

Because you have the official anonymous membership list, CaptainDork?

She also asked whether she should be prepared to ask the president if he would like to go check out some thick white broads after feasting on fried chicken and red pop (no ice).

I'm pretty sure that if you're at work and and pretty high up in a big corporation, you should have enough common sense and basic human dignity and respect not to be asking a colleague whether it's true that black people have a special bone in their ankle that prevents them from enjoying movies with white stars.

I mean, everyone knows black people like Liam Neeson movies.

Fucking people. I'm tickled whenever a huge multinational corporation has it's ass displayed for the world to see. It's a sign that they haven't completely locked down the world just yet.

As do members of unions and members of activist groups. Using your logic these groups of individuals should also be silenced.

I agree. No additional rights because you have pooled your money.

As the court has said, a group of people have the same speech rights as individual persons. There are no additional rights, just the same right.

Except, corporations are allowed to participate in elections to an extent and in ways that private citizens cannot.

Using your logic employees may have even more rights than shareholders. In your logic shareholders may have two voices, individual and corporate; while employees may have three voices, individual, corporate and union. Again I am referring to a situation such as "a steel corporation wanting the government to maintain a tariff on steel imports". The steel workers union would probably want the government to maintain the tariff too.

Right. Everybody gets the same vote. Everybody gets the same campaign finance limit (and citizens only). That's simple. Corporations, unions, etc are not citizens. They cannot vote or run for office. Why should they be allowed to participate in politics financially?

And if it was all about "rights" why has Citizens United allowed corporate donors anonymity in political finance when individuals are not allowed to be anonymous in the same way?

You make the mistake of thinking that everyone who disagrees with you is a liberal. You have an image living in your head that is not real.

A group of people does not lose its free speech rights by forming the group. Full stop.

Nor do they gain additional rights, which is the current situation under Citizens United.

I understand that you weren't trying to make a serious point, but no, the government is not a person, either. The government has no constitutional rights.

Yeah, you're probably right. I hadn't thought of it that way.

Those employees and shareholders already have their individual rights. Do you believe that the corporation should confer upon them additional rights? So that people who own stock have rights to certain speech that others do not? Because that's exactly the current situation.

Nossir. Corporate personhood was a legal shorthand that has gone out of control. It will be looked upon by history with embarrassment.

I know, but.. Sony, North Korea and the FBI. Not exactly a triumvirate of trust.

Instead of "The Interview", a theater in Texas has decided to show "Team America" instead....

Except in Texas they think Team America World Police is a documentary.