I went to bed last nght not having heard how many children were sacrificed to the 2nd Amendment in El Paso and still this morning I don't know. Presumably the Dayton slaughter, which was at a bar at 1 a.m., did not sacrifice any children.
But several mass child sarifices ago, I flipped on Fox to see how rightwingers were welcoming that news. I happened to get Tucker Carlson, the racist, and in the few seconds I listened to him, he was sneering at someone (I don't know who) who had labeled "white men" as the biggest terrorist threat in America now.
"Really?" said Carlson, "white men."
Yeah, really.
It strikes me that during the period over the last few hours when there were mass protests in favor of democracy in Moscow and Hong Kong, and when the despotisms there reacted forcefully, there were no deaths; while there were -- it appears -- at least 20 political murders in the United States and perhaps 29 (depending on the motivation of the Dayton killer).
All very fine people, working to make America great again.
ReplyDeleteTrump (or his staff) were caught deleting all his tweets using the word "invaders" about immigrants. Not changing his ideas, just rewriting history.
ReplyDelete[Harry:] I went to bed last nght not having heard how many children were sacrificed to the 2nd Amendment ...
ReplyDeleteSome people are evil. Evil people will find means to murder.
There are many other means besides guns, in case you haven't been keeping up with the news.
Trump (or his staff) were caught deleting all his tweets using the word "invaders" about immigrants. Not changing his ideas, just rewriting history.
Aside from giving us absolutely no reason to believe you, there are a great many philosophical questions involved, none of which you seem capable of taking on board.
"Evil people will find means to murder."
ReplyDeleteHow vapid. It requires a stunning degree of willfulness to ignore how much easier it is to murder, or to do other things, with guns.
Or to ignore the very simple data available from countries that lack the ready availability of guns that we have in the U.S.
Or, as innumerable people have commented, other countries play video games without mass slaughters.
ReplyDeleteTe Second Amendment does not protect only firearms but swords and suchlike. i cannot remember the last mass child sacrifice done with a sword.
The gradual heating of the water the frog is in continues steadily. I began this tread with the racist Carlson -- something Carlson has denied, as genteel racists do nowadays.
ReplyDeleteBut he continues marching toward what we may call the Klan Line. Now he and Fox are calling white nationalism "a hoax" designed by liberals "to keep power."
I propose an R pool: pick the date when Carlson goes on air in a white hood. I pick February 4.
[M:] How vapid. It requires a stunning degree of willfulness to ignore how much easier it is to murder, or to do other things, with guns.
ReplyDeleteNice, France
Oklahoma City Bombing Harry has probably forgotten about the child sacrifice performed with a truck and fertilizer.
Boston Marathon Bombing Harry has forgotten the child sacrifice performed with a pressure cooker.
School Attacks in China Harry isn't very good at keeping up with current events.
So in response, you provide a truck attack (and I'll give you, I don't understand why these don't happen more often either, although it's devilishly difficult to get those things into building), two bombings (don't know about you, but try asking anyone about degree of difficulty for bomb making vs. gun buying) and a series of knife attacks in China that manage to kill 25 people over a period of several weeks.
DeleteYou prove my point for me. Thanks!
M: It is easy to kill with many things. There is no doubt that guns are one of those things, but they are far from the only one.
DeleteAnd the one that, unlike arson and bombs, carries a much higher risk of getting caught.
So there's that.
Tell that to any police department in the nation; their solve rates are typically under 50%. But this is pointless; you're so obtuse at this point - so unwilling to acknowledge what is obvious to anyone with so much as a midbrain - that you can't see any other angles.
DeleteOr, to put it another way, have you ever actually tried to kill a whole bunch of people? Just entertain the thought for a while. What's the easiest way you can imagine, in the U.S.? Dozens of sociopaths and murderers know the answer, so I can't imagine you can't figure it out.
M: Sure, I'll entertain the thought. First, I'll have to wonder what you mean by "a bunch of people"?
DeleteBecause, depending on how big "bunch" is, some means are easier than others.
Do you know what was the means used in the attack causing the greatest number of dead children in US history?
If your "bunch" is really big, then guns aren't the way to go.
If the bunch is smaller, then without a doubt a motor vehicle, depending on the target, is by far the easiest.
One thing for sure, eliminating guns won't end mass murders.
(I don't know who) who had labeled "white men" as the biggest terrorist threat in America now.
ReplyDelete"Really?" said Carlson, "white men."
Yeah, really.
You never have had a clue about statistics. Hint: N matters.
Oh, and please explain exactly why Carlson is a racist. Use specific examples and exact quotes.
You have proven your characterizations of what other people have said cannot be trusted.
https://www.theguardian.com/media/2019/aug/06/new-york-times-front-page-headline-changed
ReplyDeleteSo, under the pressure of the progressive thought police, the NYT takes an accurate headline, and mangles it.
ReplyDeleteBut that is just more of your goal post shifting.
You accused Carlson of being a racist. Prove it, Use specific examples and exact quotes.
You won't because you can't.
You can presumably Google, as well as anyone can, his reiterations of tropes from racist and white supremacist websites; he's been doing that for a while. If you are otherwise in denial, then get your head out from under that rock and actually listen to the man. It ought to be pretty clear, unless those dog whistles are so familiar that you think they're for you.
DeleteM: I challenged you to provide specific examples, using exact quotes, that warrant the term "racist".
DeleteI want to know the quality of your reasoning. Google is no help.
You mean, say, the time he was recorded calling Iraqis "semiliterate monkeys"? Or maybe the time he questioned whether or not Barack Obama was "black"? Or the occasion when he repeated a white supremacist trope that the Irish were also subjected to slavery in 19th-century America? There are, after all, dozens of examples of Carlson monologues where he imports arguments directly from such unmistakably racist outlets.
DeleteI am otherwise disinclined to do your work for you, to about the same degree that you are disinclined to believe that racism occurs anywhere at any time. At best, you are seeking far too obvious and literal examples of racism; not all racists are filmed burning crosses on the lawns of black homeowners. At worst, you're simply an apologist for them all - one can only assume because you sympathize.
You mean, say, the time he was recorded calling Iraqis "semiliterate monkeys"?
DeleteThat is an excellent example illustrating my point.
Just to refresh, here is the dictionary definition of "racist": a person who shows or feels discrimination or prejudice against people of other races, or who believes that a particular race is superior to another: the comments have led to her being called a racist.
The first problem with this example is that Iraqis aren't a race, they are citizens of a nation-state. Second, he is criticizing Iraqi culture. Did he use pungent terms? Sure, but that doesn't make anything he said racist, and to label it as such has the effect of attempting to demonize speech contradicting progressive shibboleths.
Now if he had said something to the effect of "Arabs are incapable of democracy", then that would have clearly been a racist statement, and because it reflects a belief that those who aren't capable of democracy are inferior to those who are, then, with regard to Arabs, that would make him racist.*
In this case, the shibboleth is that all cultures are equal. Taking the position that some are better than others isn't racist, it is an arguable position based upon observable facts.
I happen to think that Islam is morally repellant, and that majority-Muslim cultures are inferior to majority-Christian cultures. Is that racist?
*Harry Eagar has stated that Arabs are incapable of democracy.
Or maybe the time he questioned whether or not Barack Obama was "black"?
How the heck is that racist?
Rather, it is the entrance to the progressive rabbit hole. Being black is either an irrevocable condition one is born into, or it is a physical characteristic that happens to strongly correlate with culturally created identity (that is, the impositions of institutional racism has created a unique community whose experience is a consequence of their ancestry).
So the question of whether Obama is "black" goes to that distinction. He has a black father, and therefore evinces the broad spectrum of physical characteristics associated with being black. However, he lived in Indonesia and Hawaii, and was raised by a white mother and grandparents.
Is Obama black? Is Rachel Dolezall? Is Caitlyn Jenner a woman?
Regardless of your answer, philosophical questions of identity aren't racist.
Or the occasion when he repeated a white supremacist trope that the Irish were also subjected to slavery in 19th-century America?
DeleteSince you didn't offer any cite, I can only guess at the context: reparations. Carlson probably invoked the experiences of other ethnic groups in the US in order to argue against the whole concept. If so, then whether white supremacist groups also make that parallel is completely irrelevant.
(BTW, in discussing reparations, I think those who limit the justifying grievance to slavery are grievously missing the larger point: true, there aren't any blacks alive who are within three generations of slavery. However, a substantial number well and truly remember, and suffered from, institutional racism. That, to me, is a compelling argument for reparations. However, waiving away all the details of who gets, gives, and amount, should such a thing come to pass, that would be license for whites to wash their hands of the whole thing.)
I am otherwise disinclined to do your work for you, to about the same degree that you are disinclined to believe that racism occurs anywhere at any time.
I am not disinclined to believe racism exists. Rather, I am very inclined to believe that almost every time a progressive invokes racism, it is almost always in bad faith.
To be sure based upon your examples I am not accusing you of acting in bad faith. However, I don't see how characterizing them as racist survives even superficial scrutiny.
Recently, Harry posted a transcript of a Pres Reagan phone conversation, in which he said things that were clearly racist. I think it very likely that Reagan in fact harbored the notion that blacks were an inferior form of human being. He was far from alone.
Skipper ought to at least ask himself, if Trump never says a racist thing, why do the American nazis think he does?
ReplyDeleteA podcast called Bundyville has some lengthy interviews on the subject of how deeply they admire Trump's statements.
https://www.npr.org/podcasts/606441988/bundyville
Skipper ought to at least ask himself, if Trump never says a racist thing, why do the American nazis think he does?
ReplyDeleteHarry ought to ask himself, although he never will, why he has to keep making crap up instead of relying on direct quotes.
To wit: I have never once asserted Trump never said anything racist. What I am saying is that using direct quotes and context, and the accepted definition of the word, you can't justify calling Trump racist.
BTW, Bundyville appears nowhere in the definitions of "racist" or "racism".
Not that you care, as you are a serial liar.
Bundyville is te name of a podcast; it is all about racism.
ReplyDeleteit would be interesting to know whether you can identify any American as a racist. I am going to guess not.
it would be interesting to know whether you can identify any American as a racist. I am going to guess not.
ReplyDeleteWell, since I haven't been going around making charges, I have none to defend.
You, however, have an extensive track record of doing so. Without once being able to substantiate even one of them.
That makes you a serial liar.
As always, of course, you could prove me wrong and earn an apology from me.
So, by all means, tell us what Carlson said that was racist, and how it was racist.
You won't because you can't, because you are lying.
Identifying any American as racist?
Easy. President Wilson. Margaret Sanger.
Two, right off the top of my head. I can provide plenty of evidence, if you require.
How about somebody who hasn't been dead for over 80 years? Hint: look at Trump's latest nomination to the 2nd Circuit Court
ReplyDeleteHarry, I have an idea: if that is the answer you want, then ask the question appropriately.
ReplyDelete[It] would be interesting to know whether you can identify any American as a racist. isn't it.
Never mind that since the definition of racism is timeless, then its exemplars are, too.
Okay, more recent examples.
Sarah Jeong.
Rev. Wright.
The New York Times.
Oh, and instead of being coy, do tell us more about this nomination to the 2nd Circuit.
ReplyDeleteLinking is so super easy that it is continually mystifying that you can't master it.
Well well, lookee here: the bankroller of Skipper's favorite policy was a spittle-flecked racist whose mentor was -- wait for it! -- Margaret Sanger.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/14/us/anti-immigration-cordelia-scaife-may.html?searchResultPosition=9
[HS:] Oh, and instead of being coy, do tell us more about this nomination to the 2nd Circuit.
ReplyDeleteI'll tell more.
Which further proves that which I have long maintained: all progressive accusations of racism are made in bad faith.
Well well, lookee here: the bankroller of Skipper's favorite policy was a spittle-flecked racist ...
ReplyDeleteSpittle flecked? Compared to Jeong or Wright?
I don't believe you.
Anybody who has lived in Hawaii or New York City understands that Menashi's premise is incorrect.
ReplyDeleteIt's jus possible that he's not racist but just ignorant, bt the effect is indistinguishable.
No, Harry. What is perfectly clear is that Maddow's accusations are in bad faith.
ReplyDeleteJust like yours always are.
In a lengthy segment on MSNBC last night, Rachel Maddow grossly distorts Menashi's argument and tries to twist it into "a high-brow argument for racial purity." (Video at 9:00-9:36.) She falsely claims that Menashi argues "how definitely democracy can't work unless the country is defined by a unifying race." (Video at 6:57-7:10.)
It is certain that your faith is just as bad as Maddow's.
And the NYT.
Well she quoted him extensively and ethno-nationalism has not been shown to be required in, eg, te Unite States.
ReplyDeleteIhf Menashi was making a particularistic argument to be applied to one place only then he could not have written the summation he did. (And would have to then be called a racist, so there's that to consider if he is to be a judge.)
Here is his paper. Show us what he says is racist, and why.
ReplyDeletehttps://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1081&context=jil
Having read it, I’m certain you won’t be able to.
States may use their repatriation laws to establish a desired demographic balance.
ReplyDeleteEpic fail, Harry. Which is why you never directly quote, because to do so would show you to be a liar or a fool. Unless it is both.
ReplyDeleteSee the WSJ editorial, “Smearing Steven Menashi”
Has it ever occurred to you that you, Maddow, and the rest of your progressive ilk are loathsome people?
The evidence is in full view right here.
Sounds racist to me, especially since it is referencing the policy of Greece towards Turks and Bulgarians,
ReplyDeleteHarry, give us a direct quote, including context, of what he wrote. Include his thesis.
ReplyDeleteUntil then, you are just blowing it out your hat.
Silence speaks volumes.
ReplyDeleteThat was a direct quote and I provided the context. Please try to keep up
ReplyDeleteDirect quotes come with quotation marks. That’s journalism 101. Do try to keep up.
ReplyDeleteSince when is a statement of fact racist? In what way is this quote racist?
Maddow is a lying hack. No wonder you were happy to follow along.
Are you and Ben Penn twins separated at birth?
ReplyDelete