Do you hold the door open for strangers?

[Dattier]

*Cries about people citing skewed and agenda driven sources*

*Cites Vox*

Note difference.

Vox is definitely liberal, on the verge of being hyper-partisan. It also contains a significant level of analysis. Its counterpart on the right would be something like The Weekly Standard. I may disagree w/ positions in The Weekly Standard, but I respect them b/c they're generally well-reasoned, fair, and honest. So is Vox.

I choose that Vox article specifically b/c it offers more gracious analysis (to conservative POVs) of Nixon's motives than, for example, CNN's coverage. It acknowledges it's more complicated than what Ehrlichman allegedly said. (And regardless of the source or whether you think he's correct or not, what Dan Baum alleges Ehrlichman said is on the record. The conservative and far more skewed, far less credible NewsMax gives more column inches to Ehrlichman's family's disputing the quotation's veracity, but what he is alleged to have said is the same as in any left-leaning source.) The Guardian is less left of center than Vox and has greater credibility, and here's an opinion column -- repeat, opinion column -- on the War on Drugs. Here's the results from a Columbia University study (though admittedly, it's from a black guy with dreadlocks, so there's that reason for conservatives to doubt, seeing as black opinions only matter when they're conservative, and then they're the authoritative voice of all black people Eyeroll).

Or The Hill. They skew conservative, but they're amazing! Regardless of Nixon's intentions, they acknowledge the racial bias in the War on Drugs in decrying AG Sessions' intention to ramp it up further:
"Law enforcement priorities exacerbated this problem. African Americans are four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses despite the fact that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate and that people who buy drugs usually purchase them from sellers of their own racial or ethnic background."

Shapiro's Daily Wire is far into the hyper-partisan category on the right, bordering on the next category -- the most extreme. It also ranks below "unfair," as "nonsense damaging to public discourse." There's no legitimate comparison between citing Vox and bringing that to the table.

I know you have no purpose here but to troll, hail. Inadvertently, you've provided me an easy, home-run-derby pitch. I'd thank you, but then, it was inadvertent, so... no. Ever hear of Vonnegut's Mother Night? At this point in a long post, I doubt you or snu or boilermaker is paying attention -- maybe toonces or letsgo will... maybe -- so I won't go into it further than pointing out the parallel between what you and the protagonist of Mother Night think you're doing and what you're really doing.

 

[Dattier]

Pass Dattier some more kool aid.

Great bumper sticker.

Identify a single thing I wrote that you actually read or thought about. In dismissing boilermaker, I provided clear reasons why. There's little doubt I dismiss him only after having heard what he had to say.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Note difference.

Vox is definitely liberal, on the verge of being hyper-partisan. It also contains a significant level of analysis. Its counterpart on the right would be something like The Weekly Standard. I may disagree w/ positions in The Weekly Standard, but I respect them b/c they're generally well-reasoned, fair, and honest. So is Vox.

I choose that Vox article specifically b/c it offers more gracious analysis (to conservative POVs) of Nixon's motives than, for example, CNN's coverage. It acknowledges it's more complicated than what Ehrlichman allegedly said. (And regardless of the source or whether you think he's correct or not, what Dan Baum alleges Ehrlichman said is on the record. The conservative and far more skewed, far less credible NewsMax gives more column inches to Ehrlichman's family's disputing the quotation's veracity, but what he is alleged to have said is the same as in any left-leaning source.) The Guardian is less left of center than Vox and has greater credibility, and here's an opinion column -- repeat, opinion column -- on the War on Drugs. Here's the results from a Columbia University study (though admittedly, it's from a black guy with dreadlocks, so there's that reason for conservatives to doubt, seeing as black opinions only matter when they're conservative, and then they're the authoritative voice of all black people Eyeroll).

Or The Hill. They skew conservative, but they're amazing! Regardless of Nixon's intentions, they acknowledge the racial bias in the War on Drugs in decrying AG Sessions' intention to ramp it up further:
"Law enforcement priorities exacerbated this problem. African Americans are four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses despite the fact that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate and that people who buy drugs usually purchase them from sellers of their own racial or ethnic background."

Shapiro's Daily Wire is far into the hyper-partisan category on the right, bordering on the next category -- the most extreme. It also ranks below "unfair," as "nonsense damaging to public discourse." There's no legitimate comparison between citing Vox and bringing that to the table.

I know you have no purpose here but to troll, hail. Inadvertently, you've provided me an easy, home-run-derby pitch. I'd thank you, but then, it was inadvertent, so... no. Ever hear of Vonnegut's Mother Night? At this point in a long post, I doubt you or snu or boilermaker is paying attention -- maybe toonces or letsgo will... maybe -- so I won't go into it further than pointing out the parallel between what you and the protagonist of Mother Night think you're doing and what you're really doing.

Vox a skewed and agenda driven source. I can’t believed you’d cite it. I hope you farm more honest than you cite.

 

[SNU0821]

Note difference.

Vox is definitely liberal, on the verge of being hyper-partisan. It also contains a significant level of analysis. Its counterpart on the right would be something like The Weekly Standard. I may disagree w/ positions in The Weekly Standard, but I respect them b/c they're generally well-reasoned, fair, and honest. So is Vox.

I choose that Vox article specifically b/c it offers more gracious analysis (to conservative POVs) of Nixon's motives than, for example, CNN's coverage. It acknowledges it's more complicated than what Ehrlichman allegedly said. (And regardless of the source or whether you think he's correct or not, what Dan Baum alleges Ehrlichman said is on the record. The conservative and far more skewed, far less credible NewsMax gives more column inches to Ehrlichman's family's disputing the quotation's veracity, but what he is alleged to have said is the same as in any left-leaning source.) The Guardian is less left of center than Vox and has greater credibility, and here's an opinion column -- repeat, opinion column -- on the War on Drugs. Here's the results from a Columbia University study (though admittedly, it's from a black guy with dreadlocks, so there's that reason for conservatives to doubt, seeing as black opinions only matter when they're conservative, and then they're the authoritative voice of all black people Eyeroll).

Or The Hill. They skew conservative, but they're amazing! Regardless of Nixon's intentions, they acknowledge the racial bias in the War on Drugs in decrying AG Sessions' intention to ramp it up further:
"Law enforcement priorities exacerbated this problem. African Americans are four times as likely as whites to be arrested for drug offenses despite the fact that whites and blacks use drugs at roughly the same rate and that people who buy drugs usually purchase them from sellers of their own racial or ethnic background."

Shapiro's Daily Wire is far into the hyper-partisan category on the right, bordering on the next category -- the most extreme. It also ranks below "unfair," as "nonsense damaging to public discourse." There's no legitimate comparison between citing Vox and bringing that to the table.

I know you have no purpose here but to troll, hail. Inadvertently, you've provided me an easy, home-run-derby pitch. I'd thank you, but then, it was inadvertent, so... no. Ever hear of Vonnegut's Mother Night? At this point in a long post, I doubt you or snu or boilermaker is paying attention -- maybe toonces or letsgo will... maybe -- so I won't go into it further than pointing out the parallel between what you and the protagonist of Mother Night think you're doing and what you're really doing.

Hahaha. Shapiro isn’t even close to being hyper-partisan. Like, not at all. The fact you call him that essentially proves you don’t really want to have a real conversation on this stuff.

 

[SNU0821]

Box is a skewed and agenda driven source. I can’t believed you’d cite it. I hope you farm more honest than you cite.

I love that Dat tries soooo hard to appear to be honest/fair. He fails every time, but it’s still funny.

 

[Boilermaker03]

Jesus man, all your videos and links are weird. And justfor future reference, every time you start a statement with something like "the left is..." it's basically followed by bullshit.

Wierd? That's an interesting take on them. Don't know what's weird about them but, ok. That's your opinion. It's also you opinion about things said about the Left. Then again, it all depends on how you define the Left.

 

[Boilermaker03]

When will you be giving equal time to the conservative side?

I said they told lies to win votes, I didn't say they were decimating communities with horrible policies and ruining our founding culture like many Dems are. Get them to actually do something that helps the poor and to stop moving towards socialism, then I'll feel better about the Left.

 

[Dattier]

I said they told lies to win votes, I didn't say they were decimating communities with horrible policies and ruining our founding culture like many Dems are. Get them to actually do something that helps the poor and to stop moving towards socialism, then I'll feel better about the Left.

So lip service about "both sides do it," a placeholder, an asterisk to point toward when called out on not being balanced at all. Eyeroll

 

[Boilermaker03]

I'm not wasting my time with most of that. It's crap along the same lines as the things I will address and I'm pretty convinced you're a lost cause. @bkingUK already did a pretty good job addressing some: your videos and links are "weird," he says, which is putting it very nicely. They're extreme and slanted and you present them as if they're objective. And you are prone to sweeping statements about "the left is..."

PROVE to me what's extreme and slanted. Shapiro for example used statistics to back his points up. Show me where he's wrong. Prove it. Neither of you have even attempted to do so yet on anything I've post. You do nothing but blow it off as if you have a position of authority and don't need to prove anything. I've given you examples with people of color agreeing with me. I've given you examples of right and libertarian talking points that are back up with data. Why don't you actually try and prove something for once. Or is it because you can't?

Lost cause, lol GTFO

"Personal responsibility" has been code for blaming people of color for their circumstances.

I've never once heard the term "personal responsibility" used in that way. I'm willing to bet a lot of money that it was used in proper context in most cases, but most of those cases happened to be involved with people of color. So, the Left manufactures the talking point you just gave us. This is what the Left does. They take any reasonable stance and try to find any way possible to skew it as racism. It's utter horseshit.

"All lives matter" is a response intended to shut down "Black lives matter." "Black lives matter" is necessary b/c there is little doubt other lives matter. There is tremendous doubt that society is fulfilling the promise of all lives mattering when it comes to black lives. If you and a group of friends go canoeing and Billy falls overboard and someone yells, "Hey! Billy needs to be in the boat!" are you going to respond with "ALL of us need to be in the boat"?

Please, PLEASE tell me how society isn't fulfilling the promise of all lives matter so I can tear it to shreds. You obviously didn't watch the video in full because it was addressed, but I'm so wanting to hear this one. This should be good.

People are trying to shut down BLM because the movement isn't trying to achieve what in reality is actually good for black lives. It's basically an oxymoron because what the BLM movement proposes will actually harm black people more than it will help.

Here's where people like yourselves need to wake the **** up and realize that what the Democratic party is feeding you constantly about the right is absolute bullshit. Any time the right tries to do something that in any way shape or form that should help the black community, they make claims that it won't work and then call it racism. I'm sorry but there's no magic bullet to help them. It's going to be really hard, but that's what they need to turn their communities and culture around. This is why I have been hating on the Democrats so much ITT. Their policies are what have been keeping the black communities in such poor conditions. Don't allow school choice, don't allow proper policing to limit crime, handouts that prevent people from wanting to help themselves get out of poverty, etc. And because of these policies, businesses don't invest in these communities, and so on. In my eyes the Democrats have never changed. They are still the oppressors of the black community. They are just doing so under a different guise. Do you think anyone in this country that has actually done well for themselves did so because the government was there to hold their hand? Hell no, they worked their ass off. There was a lot of struggle, but that struggle kept them hungry and striving for better. You don't have that drive when you are handed shit. You definitely will struggle if your schools suck and there are barely any police around to prevent you from being shot. 13% of the population is responsible for 50% of the murders. You can't tell me that isn't a big problem. But I suppose in your mind that's the fault of the Right...

 

[Boilermaker03]

That explanation of why someone went from Democrat to something else you accept at face value. Why millions of black people vote Democratic you've generalized and slandered.

Umm, slandered is a huge stretch. This was one story. I'm sure there are many people that have their own, but when talking about a group, it's hard not to generalize without knowing each persons story.

 

[Dattier]

Hahaha. Shapiro isn’t even close to being hyper-partisan. Like, not at all. The fact you call him that essentially proves you don’t really want to have a real conversation on this stuff.

One example: The facts he uses are used as blinders. He cites crime statistics and pushes the language of so-called "black-on-black crime" to deny inherently abstract things like privilege and implicit bias. Even the people who are aware of those things know that their very existence and negative impact depends on how difficult it is to pin it down. Shapiro acts as if the only way to support anything is to prove its existence with numbers. If it's not concrete, it's not real.

Consider faith. By definition, it means belief w/o absolute, scientific proof. A Shapiro-like approach would be to demand proof of God from a believer, despite that believer's acknowledgement that faith isn't based on proof. Faith doesn't fail the proof test; proof is irrelevant to faith.

 

[Dattier]

Umm, slandered is a huge stretch. This was one story. I'm sure there are many people that have their own, but when talking about a group, it's hard not to generalize without knowing each persons story.

Dismissed, disparaged, ignored, etc.

PROVE to me what's extreme and slanted. Shapiro for example used statistics to back his points up. Show me where he's wrong. Prove it.

It's not provable or unprovable. It's unfalsifiable. I just explained that to snu.

Please, PLEASE tell me how society isn't fulfilling the promise of all lives matter so I can tear it to shreds.

This is the only other thing I need to address, and it explains why it's the only other thing I need to address: You haven't heard my explanation, yet you've already predetermined that you will deny it. You are already denying what you haven't even heard yet. There is no point presenting something you've already told me you won't listen to, and there's no reason I should waste my time with a person like that.

 

[Dattier]

Vox a skewed and agenda driven source. I can’t believed you’d cite it. I hope you farm more honest than you cite.

Like I told bert, that's another nice bumper sticker.

I explained why I cited that particular Vox article. I acknowledged what bias they do have, and gave examples and comparisons to other sources, including favorable opinions of sources w/ conservative biases. You're dismissing it based on the source. I see no evidence you bothered reading what the actual article said.

 

[Boilermaker03]

White people do have many struggles and endeavors thy must face through adversity, however there is a leg up in a social standpoint for caucasians. It is what it is. Lotta conservatives have a hard time swallowing that pill.

Umm, no not really. All someone as to do to avoid permanent poverty is

1. graduate high school
2. get a job
3. don't have babies before you're married

That's according to Brookings institute what is Left leaning btw, just so you don't try to blame me for cherry picking info.

Poverty rate for 2 parent black families is 7%. Poverty rate for single white mothers is 22%.

Where's the privilege?

 

[Boilermaker03]

Dismissed, disparaged, ignored, etc.

This is the only other thing I need to address, and it explains why it's the only other thing I need to address: You haven't heard my explanation, yet you've already predetermined that you will deny it. You are already denying what you haven't even heard yet. There is no point presenting something you've already told me you won't listen to, and there's no reason I should waste my time with a person like that.

Huge cop out. I dismissed it because I had a very good idea on what you were going to say. Common, let's hear it. I haven't heard a good argument from you guys on one damn thing yet. Where's the substance from which you hold your values? Don't you have something to back up your beliefs?

 

[Boilermaker03]

No! Nothing wrong with any of that. He accepts it as he ought to and I know of no reason anyone should doubt anything you said.

When black people share their experience with racism, they don't get the same, appropriate benefit of the doubt.

I have no issue with anyone calling something racism if there is racism. Show me the problem and I'll stand by their side. The issue we have is when racism is screamed and there's video evidence of the person acting like a complete jackass and the white/other person doing everything they can to not offend this person. THAT's the crap I take issue with.

 

[anon_0astpxev9h4gk]

Umm, no not really. All someone as to do to avoid permanent poverty is

1. graduate high school
2. get a job
3. don't have babies before you're married

That's according to Brookings institute what is Left leaning btw, just so you don't try to blame me for cherry picking info.

Poverty rate for 2 parent black families is 7%. Poverty rate for single white mothers is 22%.

Where's the privilege?

No, it’s really not that simple, however you seem like the type that thinks skin color is irrelevant in the grand scheme of opportunity. That pill must still be rattling in your throat. Oh, and nice arbitrary statistics to fit your weak narrative.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Like I told bert, that's another nice bumper sticker.

I explained why I cited that particular Vox article. I acknowledged what bias they do have, and gave examples and comparisons to other sources, including favorable opinions of sources w/ conservative biases. You're dismissing it based on the source. I see no evidence you bothered reading what the actual article said.

I'm simply pointing out your hypocrisy in crying about "skewed and agenda driven sources" and then using skewed and agenda driven sources.

Not the brightest bulb in the bunch eh, Dattier?

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

Great bumper sticker.

Identify a single thing I wrote that you actually read or thought about. In dismissing boilermaker, I provided clear reasons why. There's little doubt I dismiss him only after having heard what he had to say.

I understand everything that you stated Datt. It was from the left-wing talking points.

Think for yourself and don't drink the kool aide.

 

[Boilermaker03]

No, it’s really not that simple, however you seem like the type that thinks skin color is irrelevant in the grand scheme of opportunity. That pill must still be rattling in your throat. Oh, and nice arbitrary statistics to fit your weak narrative.

Because skin color IS irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. We just had a black president FFS. If skin color was such a big issue, how did that happen? This white privilege/racism shtick has no real teeth. Again, I acknowledge that there's racism, but it's few and far between. I'll gladly stand with anyone that experiences it and fight on their side.

So tell me this, do you honestly think that allowing school choice, removing federal handouts and adding more police to communities of color is bad for them? If so, how?

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

Huge cop out. I dismissed it because I had a very good idea on what you were going to say. Common, let's hear it. I haven't heard a good argument from you guys on one damn thing yet. Where's the substance from which you hold your values? Don't you have something to back up your beliefs?

That's the Democratic way. No ideas, no actual policies, no answers/solutions to problems. They campaign on social issues and take no responsibility for their own failures. When voters don't line up like the sheep they think they are, it is because they're uneducated, influenced by Russian bots, sexist and/or racist.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

So Trump is looking to host a race relations summit at the White House with people from many different ends of the spectrum. Hopefully many people attend. It is rumored that Colin Kaepernick will be invited and encouraged to attend.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/articl...sf/2018/05/donald_trump_invites_colin_kae.amp

What are the thoughts on this? I suspect some people will just pass it off as a waste of time. But I am hopeful that this will be very beneficial for everyone. As long as everyone involved goes into it with an open mind.

 

[schoonerwest]

I just wanted to post this article because it is relevant to the topic 3-4 days ago.

California passes the UK to become the 5th largest economy in the world. But their economy is going to shit I’m told so must be fake news.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article210466514.html

 

[Bert Higginbotha]

Umm, no not really. All someone as to do to avoid permanent poverty is

1. graduate high school
2. get a job
3. don't have babies before you're married

That's according to Brookings institute what is Left leaning btw, just so you don't try to blame me for cherry picking info.

Poverty rate for 2 parent black families is 7%. Poverty rate for single white mothers is 22%.

Where's the privilege?

The black on black murder rate is driven by not doing 1, 2 & 3. The white on white murder rate is driven by not doing 1, 2 & 3. What is the government supposed to do for any young man who will not do 1, 2 & 3? Give him welfare for fvcking life? Should government reward this behavior?

Many kids think it is cool to make horrible grades and leave school at 16. Does government reward such ******ed behavior?

I went to school a long time ago. By the 8th grade I knew who was going to make it in life and I also knew who would not. Guess what, it proved out. The hard working kids made it, the lazy asses flunked life.

There is no such thing as privilege driving the end result. Privilege is taking advantage of the opportunities you are given. My privilege was my parents putting pressure on me and my sister to become successful. That is the "white" privilege given me; two resourcefull parents making me work.

 

[Boilermaker03]

I just wanted to post this article because it is relevant to the topic 3-4 days ago.

California passes the UK to become the 5th largest economy in the world. But their economy is going to shit I’m told so must be fake news.

http://www.sacbee.com/news/business/article210466514.html

It's had a boost from the current resurgence by the US economy. There are plenty of articles out there acknowledging this, but also warning that there's a dark cloud over the state because of it's debt issue.

Nobody has said it was a static issue.

 

[schoonerwest]

You do realize that the GDP of California has gone down CONSIDERABLY under the watch of the Left right? California has the 7th highest economy in the world right now. Before the left took over it was the 5th. California is going to hell in a hand basket and the rest of the country would be better of without them.

You originally said this. Most things seem to say that California outpaced the US economy by a bunch around the past 10 years or so. So I’m not sure what you meant when you said “gone down considerably under the watch of the left”. Also, where did you get your numbers that say they went from 5th to 7th? Sorry to bring up a topic that went dead already, and one that you already answered for, but I don’t think you told us exactly where you got your evidence/numbers from. I hope it wasn’t in that 30 minute YouTube clip.

FYI, I agree that a lot of newer California regulations seem to cause many to move to more tax friendly states and ones that don’t require so much permitting. I think to drill a new oil well there now is pretty much impossible. I believe I was told it required something like 600 permits but that may have been (likely was) just drunk talk with friends one night. Regardless, the exploration there is pretty much non-existent compared to what it could be with their reserves.

 

[LetsGoDuke301]

It's had a boost from the current resurgence by the US economy. There are plenty of articles out there acknowledging this, but also warning that there's a dark cloud over the state because of it's debt issue.

Nobody has said it was a static issue.

To be fair. The same can be said about the country's economy.

 

[Boilermaker03]

You originally said this. Most things seem to say that California outpaced the US economy by a bunch around the past 10 years or so. So I’m not sure what you meant when you said “gone down considerably under the watch of the left”. Also, where did you get your numbers that say they went from 5th to 7th? Sorry to bring up a topic that went dead already, and one that you already answered for, but I don’t think you told us exactly where you got your evidence/numbers from. I hope it wasn’t in that 30 minute YouTube clip.

FYI, I agree that a lot of newer California regulations seem to cause many to move to more tax friendly states and ones that don’t require so much permitting. I think to drill a new oil well there now is pretty much impossible. I believe I was told it required something like 600 permits but that may have been (likely was) just drunk talk with friends one night. Regardless, the exploration there is pretty much non-existent compared to what it could be with their reserves.

I haven't seen this. I've read some articles talking about the current resurgence over the last 2-3 years or so, but 10 is news to me. Although considering how poorly the world as a whole was doing over the last 10 years, it probably wouldn't be too hard considering all the resources they have.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rt-martial-reducing-female-recruit-tears.html

 

[Boilermaker03]

To be fair. The same can be said about the country's economy.

Yes of course, but California has a lot more going for it that the rest of the country doesn't. Too bad the deficit in that state is around $426 Billion. Next closest state is New York with $354 Billion.

I heard somewhere the that unfunded liabilities of Cali is around $1.3 Trillion.

 

[schoonerwest]

I haven't seen this. I've read some articles talking about the current resurgence over the last 2-3 years or so, but 10 is news to me. Although considering how poorly the world as a whole was doing over the last 10 years, it probably wouldn't be too hard considering all the resources they have.

Here’s a long and detailed article about the California economy from almost exactly 1 year ago.


https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-10/california-leads-u-s-economy-away-from-trump

 

[Boilermaker03]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...rt-martial-reducing-female-recruit-tears.html

I don't like females being treated poorly. That said, it's this guys job to train her to be tough that way she or whomever won't be killed in battle. What's he supposed to do, hold her hand? You have to be tough to be in the military. It's not for the weak.

 

[Boilermaker03]

Here’s a long and detailed article about the California economy from almost exactly 1 year ago.


https://www.bloomberg.com/view/articles/2017-05-10/california-leads-u-s-economy-away-from-trump

California has 1/8th of the US population and the majority of the wealthy due to the actors, tech industry, etc. People are still leaving in high numbers due to the high taxes and extremely high housing costs.

https://www.google.com/search?sourc...131i46k1j46i131k1j0i131k1j0i3k1.0.rN8sHDQxmxU

Some big businesses are starting to leave too.

http://www.calbizjournal.com/whybusinessesleavecalifornia/

The trend for California and the US as a whole is the same if you look on the graph. So as the US goes, so does California for the most part, but that doesn't take into account the debt. The graph also shows the UK and Germany falling off since late 2014 allowing us to pass them. (graph is on the Bloomberg site you linked)

 

[Dattier]

What are the thoughts on this? I suspect some people will just pass it off as a waste of time. But I am hopeful that this will be very beneficial for everyone. As long as everyone involved goes into it with an open mind.

It's surprising, but encouraging. I'll hold off judgment and hope it goes well.

Huge cop out. I dismissed it because I had a very good idea on what you were going to say. Common, let's hear it. I haven't heard a good argument from you guys on one damn thing yet. Where's the substance from which you hold your values? Don't you have something to back up your beliefs?

lol
I explained the rationale behind my truncated answer entirely, citing your own post. You continue that here, in the bold. Everything I've said here are things I believe and things I've offered thorough, logical explanations for, so if you're claiming you haven't heard even the first good argument -- not that you disagree, but that you haven't even heard a single good argument yet -- it's a matter of your being unwilling or unable to listen, as far as I'm concerned. That's the first hurdle you'd have to overcome if we're to resume any worthwhile discussion, I'm telling you for the second time.

 

[Boilermaker03]

It's surprising, but encouraging. I'll hold off judgment and hope it goes well.


lol
I explained the rationale behind my truncated answer entirely, citing your own post. You continue that here, in the bold. Everything I've said here are things I believe and things I've offered thorough, logical explanations for, so if you're claiming you haven't heard even the first good argument -- not that you disagree, but that you haven't even heard a single good argument yet -- it's a matter of your being unwilling or unable to listen, as far as I'm concerned. That's the first hurdle you'd have to overcome if we're to resume any worthwhile discussion, I'm telling you for the second time.

Wrong. I've heard all of the arguments you have used before and they are poor. I don't understand how a rational thinking person can believe in the things you presented. Besides, that's not how logic works. It doesn't care about what you THINK is logical. It only cares about what IS logical and is backed with evidence, not feelings.

 

[Dattier]

So tell me this, do you honestly think that allowing school choice, removing federal handouts and adding more police to communities of color is bad for them?

Everything else being equal, yup.

If so, how?

No, thanks. I've already explained why.

Because skin color IS irrelevant in the grand scheme of things.

It ought to be, but it isn't and it never has been.

We just had a black president FFS. If skin color was such a big issue, how did that happen?

lol

This white privilege/racism shtick has no real teeth. Again, I acknowledge that there's racism, but it's few and far between. I'll gladly stand with anyone that experiences it and fight on their side.

All very well and good to claim to acknowledge racism exists. Cynically dismissing every allegation of racism is a pretty good way to be sure you'll never have to follow through on standing and fighting against it. You're dismissing out of pocket the very nature of racism today in your first sentence. It no longer tends to show itself via direct confessions.

 

[Dattier]

Wrong. I've heard all of the arguments you have used before and they are poor. I don't understand how a rational thinking person can believe in the things you presented. Besides, that's not how logic works. It doesn't care about what you THINK is logical. It only cares about what IS logical and is backed with evidence, not feelings.

I don't know what you're referring to as "things [I've] presented." I haven't seen evidence you've heard anything I've said since the distinction between liberal-conservative and Dem-Rep several pages ago.

Evidence is not an inherent prerequisite of logic. Often we use logic b/c we have to fill in the gap. Some evidence requires little effort or logic be added to it.

 

[Dattier]

I love that Dat tries soooo hard to appear to be honest/fair. He fails every time, but it’s still funny.

I don't see how I'm any different in tone and process from the "Is it racist" thread where you said this about me:

I agree. While I don't agree with his point of view on things, he's been very cordial with his responses which I appreciate.

It's one thing to disagree. It's another thing to be unwilling to see any point or to be disrespectful.

 

[SNU0821]

I don't see how I'm any different in tone and process from the "Is it racist" thread where you said this about me:

It's one thing to disagree. It's another thing to be unwilling to see any point or to be disrespectful.

You’re being knowingly dishonest. Big difference.

 

[anon_0astpxev9h4gk]

Because skin color IS irrelevant in the grand scheme of things. We just had a black president FFS. If skin color was such a big issue, how did that happen? This white privilege/racism shtick has no real teeth. Again, I acknowledge that there's racism, but it's few and far between. I'll gladly stand with anyone that experiences it and fight on their side.

So tell me this, do you honestly think that allowing school choice, removing federal handouts and adding more police to communities of color is bad for them? If so, how?

But it's not though, to you it may be, to a majority of people it kind of is a thing. But go on believing what you do.

Also lol at the few and far between, not going to even address that falsehood.

And there's no bludgeoning this into your head at all, you already seem to have your mind made up on the matter, which is fine, I just disagree wholeheartedly, and find what your saying to be absolute and utter bs.


As for your last statement, systemic racism is a thing, I know you probably consider that to be fake news as well, but your bubble seems comfy. Enjoy it I suppose.