ALPB Forum Online

ALPB => Your Turn => Topic started by: Tom Eckstein on June 04, 2020, 01:26:54 PM

Title: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Tom Eckstein on June 04, 2020, 01:26:54 PM
https://youtu.be/0xkokrL0uBw
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 04, 2020, 01:43:58 PM
https://youtu.be/0xkokrL0uBw
My first thought was, "Who is Candace Owen?" But she seems very articulate. I think she's arguing the same thing I am, which is that the demand for solidarity along racial lines, coming from both from without and within one's "racial community," is debilitating especially to black America, which needs to escape the downward spiral that is not of its own making but is its own ongoing experience.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Coach-Rev on June 04, 2020, 01:58:37 PM
You've never heard of Candace Owens?  She is a well known conservative commentator and activist.  Her voice should be heard much more but because she (and other black folks like her) don't fit the liberal, progressive narrative, she is marginalized and ignored.  This video points some of that out as well.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 04, 2020, 02:06:56 PM
You've never heard of Candace Owens?  She is a well known conservative commentator and activist.  Her voice should be heard much more but because she (and other black folks like her) don't fit the liberal, progressive narrative, she is marginalized and ignored.  This video points some of that out as well.
After I watched I realized that I recognized her from something. But I don't watch tv much at all and I'm not on social media. Even if I have read articles by her I couldn't place the name.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: mj4 on June 04, 2020, 03:50:52 PM
As Pr. Austin says, life is complicated. Here's another view...from an "evangelical" magazine, by the way.

https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/may/george-floyd-ministry-houston-third-ward-church.html (https://www.christianitytoday.com/news/2020/may/george-floyd-ministry-houston-third-ward-church.html)
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Richard Johnson on June 04, 2020, 04:19:17 PM
but because she (and other black folks like her) don't fit the liberal, progressive narrative, she is marginalized and ignored. 

And you know this how?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 04, 2020, 04:48:48 PM
If she is a well-known commentator and activist, how is she marginalized?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 04, 2020, 05:04:23 PM
If she is a well-known commentator and activist, how is she marginalized?
My guess the same way many well-known conservatives are-- not invited to be a part of discussions outside conservative circles except as a token conservative.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 04, 2020, 05:48:27 PM
So if she does get invited somewhere it’s not because people want to hear her, but because she’s a “token” conservative?
So you set up a no-win situation for yourself.
Even if a conservatives is invited To the discussion, you are grumpy about it because that person is a “token.”
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Robert Johnson on June 04, 2020, 07:11:16 PM
but because she (and other black folks like her) don't fit the liberal, progressive narrative, she is marginalized and ignored. 

And you know this how?

Because it is obvious.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 04, 2020, 08:25:28 PM
If she is a well-known commentator and activist, how is she marginalized?
My guess the same way many well-known conservatives are-- not invited to be a part of discussions outside conservative circles except as a token conservative.
You mean like David Brooks is the token conservative on the PBS Newshour on Friday evenings. 😲
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 04, 2020, 08:49:01 PM
See how foolish you sound? If Brooks were never invited to the table, you would howl about Conservatives being left out. But he is invited -  because he is smart, reasonable, historically aware and can discuss things with some grace - and you grump about a “token” conservative.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 04, 2020, 10:05:03 PM

See how foolish you sound? If Brooks were never invited to the table, you would howl about Conservatives being left out. But he is invited -  because he is smart, reasonable, historically aware and can discuss things with some grace - and you grump about a “token” conservative.
I believe you intentionally mis understand .. Presenting David Brooks as a real conservative is totally laughable ... Rev Austin's own words show his is fully aware of Mr Brooks liberal tendencies ... he describes Me Brooks as 'smart, reasonable, and historically aware, and can discuss some things with grace.' That is simply code for 'not quite as left wing liberal' as our highly partisan correspondent.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 05, 2020, 12:10:32 AM
James writes (my emphasis added);
Presenting David Brooks as a real conservative is totally laughable ... Rev Austin's own words show his is fully aware of Mr Brooks liberal tendencies ... he describes Me Brooks as 'smart, reasonable, and historically aware, and can discuss some things

I comment:
Hey! If you say those words Describe “liberal tendencies” and can’t be used to describe a conservative, I guess I shouldn’t try to argue with you.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 05, 2020, 01:16:46 AM
David Brooks, a never Trumper, loves GOP politicians like John McCain. Except that when the GOP actually nominated McCain, Brooks voted for the Democrat. That’s the sort of conservative liberals love. And it is fatigue with that kind of garbage that elevated Trump. Brooks hates that Trump is such a bull in a china shop, but the whole point of Trump was to smash the china.

I like Brooks as a cultural critic. But I don’t think he understands Trump or the electorate as much as he thinks he does.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 05, 2020, 01:29:55 AM
James writes (my emphasis added);
Presenting David Brooks as a real conservative is totally laughable ... Rev Austin's own words show his is fully aware of Mr Brooks liberal tendencies ... he describes Me Brooks as 'smart, reasonable, and historically aware, and can discuss some things

I comment:
Hey! If you say those words Describe “liberal tendencies” and can’t be used to describe a conservative, I guess I shouldn’t try to argue with you.
Point being that Rev Austin never attempted (and quite purposefully) to use conservative when speaking of Mr Brooks.  Knowing that Rev Austin chooses his words carefully ... the words he chose not to use said volumes more that what he did use.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 05, 2020, 03:40:34 AM
Peter writes:
Brooks hates that Trump is such a bull in a china shop, but the whole point of Trump was to smash the china.

I comment:
Was the china supposed to be the Constitution, democracy, our role in the world, the rule of law and the rights of protestors?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: RandyBosch on June 05, 2020, 09:20:53 AM
Peter writes:
Brooks hates that Trump is such a bull in a china shop, but the whole point of Trump was to smash the china.

I comment:
Was the china supposed to be the Constitution, democracy, our role in the world, the rule of law and the rights of protestors?

With the exception of the kerfuffle that occurred when the federal police ineptly cleared a path for the president to visit a recently fire-damaged church (where the message board out front says "All are Welcome") and some inappropriate blustering, Trump isn't the one who smashed the rest of your china set -- it was local police, mayors and governors in a bunch of cities taking direction from their local elected leadership and appointed commissioners - and in some cases from their own systemic racism.

There was more than a little bit of china-smashing by rioters.  The extent of destruction on many major shopping streets was almost as extensive as a Kristelnacht re-enactment, God forbid.  Perhaps the victims of the smashed windows, looted stores and beatings/shootings of their owners were part of one presidential candidate's recently uttered "10 to 15 percent of Americans are not very good people"?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 05, 2020, 09:44:14 AM
Peter writes:
Brooks hates that Trump is such a bull in a china shop, but the whole point of Trump was to smash the china.

I comment:
Was the china supposed to be the Constitution, democracy, our role in the world, the rule of law and the rights of protestors?
When are you going to pause your incessant screed and open your eyes to all the damage and bodily injury inflicted 'protesters'?  If black lives really matter to you, where is your righteous indignation and condemnation of the senseless murder of the retired policeman in St Louis.  Hopefully I'm able to locate the video I saw showing violence committed against property and the senseless bodily injury you refuse to condemn.

Apparently being tolerant includes turning a blind eye at violence and bodily injury such as this ... your refusal to a knowledge these tragic events is hypocritical!
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 05, 2020, 11:37:48 AM
Randy Bosch writes:
With the exception of the kerfuffle that occurred when the federal police ineptly cleared a path for the president to visit a recently fire-damaged church (where the message board out front says "All are Welcome") and some inappropriate blustering, Trump isn't the one who smashed the rest of your china set -- it was local police, mayors and governors in a bunch of cities taking direction from their local elected leadership and appointed commissioners - and in some cases from their own systemic racism.
I comment:
It should have been clear that I was referring to much more "china-breaking" than has gone on in the past two weeks.

Randy Bosch writes:'
There was more than a little bit of china-smashing by rioters.  The extent of destruction on many major shopping streets was almost as extensive as a Kristelnacht re-enactment, God forbid.
I comment:
I shall have to make one of those "with all due respect" comments. I lived 40 years among Jews and in a place where they came to constitute about 40 percent of the citizenry. So, with all due respect, you have obviously not, or you would know that making any, yes, any comparison with things that happened during the Nazi era is offensive and highly insensitive. Your "almost as extensive as a Kristallnacht (and yes, again, spelling counts) re-enactment" might be excused because you don't know any better. But now you do.
That inept comparison fails on many levels. On those terrible days in 1938, the damage was focused on one segment of the population, perpetrated by agencies under the direction of the government, and part of a much larger, institutional campaign against Jews.
Personally, I consider this president a grave threat to our democracy and capable of trashing our constitution and wanting to bring the power of our military down on those who oppose him. But he is not Hitler. The German had an obscenely warped view of nationalism and German "purity." Our president has only a desire to stoke his ego, appear to be a "tough guy," flatten those who oppose him no matter what religion or party they inhabit, and get re-elected.
Note to all: I do not find it useful to answer the various "questions" posed by James. Sensible people here will understand that I oppose all violence against persons and riotous damage of property. The fact that I don't mention incidents dear to his heart means nothing; and I have no intent of trying to show how every incident of violence in every setting is not equal.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 05, 2020, 12:23:42 PM
Note to all: I do not find it useful to answer the various "questions" posed by James. Sensible people here will understand that I oppose all violence against persons and riotous damage of property. The fact that I don't mention incidents dear to his heart means nothing; and I have no intent of trying to show how every incident of violence in every setting is not equal.
Rev Austin feigns ‘I oppose all violence ...’ yet rather than clearly condemn ongoing violence, his screeds against the police and other law enforcement personnel whose body and life are threaten routinely by those he seems so eager to defend.


Massive amounts of funds are being contributed for restitution of those whose property has unjustly been damaged or destroyed .. the bias press praising the actions without and condemnation of those who viciously and unnecessarily caused the damage and distraction.


Rev Austin, where your heart is ... your words will follow!😶
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Michael Slusser on June 05, 2020, 12:36:45 PM
https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10101056006052992&id=79101091 (https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=10101056006052992&id=79101091)
I don't know Candace Owens, nor do I know Kenneth Mack II, the author of this FB critique of some of her work--perhaps not the piece Tom Eckstein shared with us. Because the FB link may expire, I'll try to copy and paste his text, too.
Mack is a Republican and a Black Pentecostal preacher.
Quote
❗A LETTER TO CANDACE OWENS❗

Dear Candace,

The purpose of this letter is not condescending nor written for eristic intentions, but to express concerns that are noticed by the black community (including notable members within the Republican party). I am not opposed to your political ideologies; actually, we share the same viewpoints, but have chosen to express them differently. Conservative adherents are grieved about your intellectual dishonesty & self-deprecating remarks you have opined, not only regarding the case of Ahmaud Arbery, but persistent negative commentary towards African Americans. In addition, your increasing extreme beliefs concerning "true conservative ideals," has caused division in our nation in the name of patriotism.

The following statements have proceeded out of your mouth in the absence of wisdom, couth, & circumspect. For each deplorable comment; I have responded with a compassionate refutation.

“Blacks kill twice as many whites as whites kill blacks.”

Candace, criminality is pervasive throughout both black & white communities. 57% of crimes involving white victims were committed by white perpetrators, while 15% were committed by blacks. Black violent crime victims composed 63% of crimes committed by black perpetrators, while 11% were committed by whites. Intra-racial victimization is significantly higher than the percentage of interracial victimization (robbery is the only exception). The rate of white on white crime is actually four times higher than black on white crime. Pertaining to murder,73% of white crime victims were committed by whites, and 80% of black victims were targeted by other African Americans. Even violent criminal acts such as sexual assault are not led by black men. 57% are done so by white men & 27% for black men. I am alarmed, (but not surprised) the distorted statistics in which you publicly disseminate emanate from the infamous white supremacist Jared Taylor.

“Black America is silent concerning gang violence within our own communities. “Our culture is a joke.”

Endemic warfare in the form of gang violence has not in any way been ignored by the black community. Many gang prevention programs have been directed by prominent black leaders, and former gang members enhancing the family unit, providing economic opportunity, endeavoring to end cycles of poverty and crime. This erroneous statement is engendered by a personal quarantine from the black community unless paid to appear for self-promotion. There are nearly inordinate amounts of programs specifically targeted to mitigate the effects of gang violence. Do not falsely postulate that blacks do not accept accountability for intra-racial violence, while you absolve racially motivated crimes labeling blacks who decry racism as “emotional” or “ignorant”. It is a moral and theological responsibility to fervently expose racism and endemic warfare with equal vehemence.

Also, I want to encourage you to evaluate your myopic view of the term “black community.” Black families are not relegated to the hood or inner city. 39% of black families live in the suburbs, 36% live in cities, 15% in small metropolitan areas, & 10% in rural areas. Black families are just as diverse as their contributions to the USA. Our immense cultural legacy is certainly no laughing matter.

“Still wondering why black Americans lag behind other races?”

In certain aspects, African Americans certainly face challenges, specifically in public school education. However, African Americans are garnering much success. Black women are the fastest growing entrepreneurs in the United States, and abortion has declined each year since 2011. 2.5 million black men are considered upper middle class, and poverty has reduced from 41% to 18%. Black men have increased middle class status from 38% to 57%. Literally one in two black men have reached middle class or higher. Prior to Covid 19, black unemployment was the lowest in US history. The most elite athletes, entertainers, and many geniuses are black. Obviously the first minority President was not Asian, Hispanic, or Middle Eastern, but a black man by the name of Barack Obama. Regardless of his political views, to be the most powerful man in the world as a black man is MONUMENTAL and should receive bi-partisan admiration.

“Name one other race in America that protests & riots when their criminals die while committing crimes.”

Criminal history should not result in death by vigilante. It is the responsibility of the legal process to determine in a court of law who should be convicted of crime. Blacks (especially conservatives) are disappointed of your viewpoint concerning the senseless deaths of black men & women. Jordan Davis did not have a criminal history and was shot dead in his own vehicle for the volume of his music. Botham Jean had no criminal history, Atatiana Jefferson was inside of her house when a bullet rendered her lifeless, & the nine people who were murdered by Dylan Roof were worshipping. The increase of protests within the black community is not due to the endless babble of racial conspiracy theories, but the language of racial intolerance that has gone unheard.

“White nationalism & racism are not a serious threat, but the real issue is a constant media narrative for blacks to operate in fear and vote democrat during the election cycle.”

Candace, this is probably the most heinous comment you have made. Racism is not maintained by a political party. Prejudice is a posture of the heart. I certainly agree the media has created false narratives concerning race, but this does not disregard the very real presence of racism in the United States & throughout the world. Your conjecture is also hypocritical. In 2007, you were harassed, threatened, and experienced the reality of racism first hand, as the son of then Connecticut mayor Dannel Malloy perpetuated the crime. You left your high school for six weeks due to racial trauma. This resulted in a $37,500 settlement in January of 2008, aided by the legal council of the NAACP.

FBI statistics have reported hate crimes are at a 16 year high, with blacks being 47% of targeted victims (as you stated we are 13% of the population). There are currently over 1,000 hate groups in the United States with many criminal investigations/arrests in relation to law enforcement hate group associations. Racism is prevalent on domestic, societal, corporate, environmental, & political levels. The most dangerous prison gang in the USA is not the black dominated bloods or crips, but the Aryan Brotherhood who are only 1% of the prison population, but responsible for 18% of the murders in the federal prison population.

“Avid joggers do not run in khakis”

This statement is a result of the discriminatory act of physiognomy, where the internal character of a man is determined by his facial/physical appearance. I am not concerned with the clothing someone is wearing, but the evidence presented in the case. While it is true Ahmaud entered a house under construction. It is also ostensible that he did not steal anything out of the home. Even if the young man did “trespass” he should not have been pursued by two men with guns. I live in a brand new subdivision where homes are currently under construction with people viewing them in broad daylight without an appointment and they all have lived to tell about it.

Lastly, your extreme associations with other black people who believe to be authentically conservative is to abandon African ancestry is nefarious. What is even more alarming is you use the holy scriptures to do so. I have heard comments such as “I am not black. I am American.” There is a vast difference between ethnicity & nationality. Ethnicity is the internal DNA consisting of familial, & cultural phenotypes preserving genetic identity. Nationality is the external geographic landscape where an individual was born or gained citizenship status.

Candace, believe it or not, there is an awakening of conscious conservatism where black men and women will fully embrace and celebrate the Christ likeness of their beautiful black complexion, while preserving conservative political ideals. God is not colorblind, but purposefully created ethnicity and culture as a multicultural reflection of his image and likeness in the earth! God is the inception of Genesis 1:26 & the fulfillment of Revelations 7:9.

Your actions have hindered the potential “blexit” from the Democratic party to Republican affiliation due to your Eurocentric obsequious behavior. Although I am a PROUD Republican, I will not engage in self righteous behavior and gasconade as a “better black.” I will not have white conservatives endorse me publicly as a satisfactory African American because I am conservative, but privately call black liberals niggers. Truthfully, I love black Democrats as well, no matter how much political vitriol between us. It is my desire that you evaluate your motivation for politics. Political popularity, nor personal acclaim are the proper aspirations for government involvement. Government is designed to establish civility, economic prosperity, and preserve inalienable human rights with integrity.

Sincerely,

Kenneth Mack II

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Fcdwyn on June 05, 2020, 01:42:58 PM
https://youtu.be/0xkokrL0uBw

Another video of interest?

https://www.westernjournal.com/watch-african-immigrant-blm-protesters-black-lives-matter-joke/?utm_source=push&utm_medium=westernjournalism&utm_content=2020-06-05&utm_campaign=pushtraffic
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 05, 2020, 03:59:56 PM
Yeah, That video is a brilliant example of civil dialogue. Not.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Coach-Rev on June 05, 2020, 05:37:23 PM
Yeah, That video is a brilliant example of civil dialogue. Not.

There ARE important factors mentioned here, despite the source (that is indeed a biased one).

“'When black people kill black people, they don’t come out and do this crap,' she said. 'The only time they do this crap is when a white person does it.'  Ninety-four percent of black homicide victims from 1976 to 2005 were killed by other African-Americans, the National Review reported last year.

Over the Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, 84 people were wounded by gun violence and 24 of them died, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

Yumga attempted to point out facts like these but was met with willful ignorance and combativeness."


Way to so casually dismiss an opinion contrary to your own.  Way to meet her perspective with willful ignorance and combativeness, Charles.

Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Eileen Smith on June 05, 2020, 07:18:23 PM
Yeah, That video is a brilliant example of civil dialogue. Not.

There ARE important factors mentioned here, despite the source (that is indeed a biased one).

“'When black people kill black people, they don’t come out and do this crap,' she said. 'The only time they do this crap is when a white person does it.'  Ninety-four percent of black homicide victims from 1976 to 2005 were killed by other African-Americans, the National Review reported last year.

Over the Memorial Day weekend in Chicago, 84 people were wounded by gun violence and 24 of them died, the Chicago Sun-Times reported.

Yumga attempted to point out facts like these but was met with willful ignorance and combativeness."


Way to so casually dismiss an opinion contrary to your own.  Way to meet her perspective with willful ignorance and combativeness, Charles.

I found Candace's video one of not really comprehending what is happening in America and what has gone on for years.  There are points I'd quibble with but primarily all I can see is the hopelessness of blacks.  Spending most of my life in the Bronx and Queens I saw neighborhoods decline and I don't believe for a moment it was lack of upkeep (as some have thought to put out there) but day after day after day of living in a world of no hope.  This builds and builds until it simply overflows and we're seeing that played out.

The more important video is the one of a retired (doesn't matter - active or retired) law enforcement officer killing another human being in such a brutal way that I can't even write about it without tears.  There are no adjectives.  Reprehensible, deplorable - there are none that captures this act and the other officers who chose to watch.  AND, perhaps most importantly, not simply blacks who saw it but young blacks who see this as the way their lives will play out.  So they loot a store - what does it matter - they have no hope in our legal system.

Are there, as alleged, people protesting for reasons other than this senseless death; that is, do some have another agenda?  That may be, but it doesn't negate from the issue that a man suffered a death he should not have endured by people whom he should be able to trust.

I have been unable to discuss this death even with family and friends who may agree with me.  I may not comment again on this thread as some things are just too difficult to ponder.  But I will state this and it comes with an apology of sorts.  For almost four years I have read Pastor Austin's assessment of Trump and while I might not like Trump I didn't see him as one to be feared.  I am prepared to say that I agree with Pastor Austin.  This man is soulless.  He has little touch with reality and in the reality of the world he lives in there is absolutely no compassion or even the smallest attempt at understanding others.  His handing of COVID convinced me that he is not equipped to lead this country in a crisis and these past few days have convinced me that what I simply put down to ego is rather megalomania and that he is, indeed, dangerous.

Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 05, 2020, 07:29:51 PM
Does anyone yet have any evidence that race was a factor? Allowing that assumption to stand without evidence will contribute more to perpetuating hopelessness among young black men than almost anything else.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Tom Eckstein on June 05, 2020, 08:06:32 PM
Does anyone yet have any evidence that race was a factor? Allowing that assumption to stand without evidence will contribute more to perpetuating hopelessness among young black men than almost anything else.

Peter, I agree with your question.  What is the evidence that this particular horrible act by a police officer was racially motivated?  When black police officers unjustly kill black or white citizens, is this racially motivated?

There is no doubt that black people have had deep struggles in America, but things have improved greatly in the past 50 years - and yet the black community, especially in inner cities, continues to have serious problems.  Is it all because of poverty?  There are plenty of people of all skin color who live in poverty and yet do not view their lives as hopeless nor do they resort to a life of crime.  There are deeper cultural problems within the black community that cannot be explained merely by racism or poverty - one of them being the breakdown of the black family.

This 5 minute video by Ben Shapiro sums up the deeper problem well:   https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4kbF7mvBWo&fbclid=IwAR0S2l5_u4-idHHAPRLksIRrhzhOBkKPWnPkaDGw2M9QsE94_AQaWc32qMk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4kbF7mvBWo&fbclid=IwAR0S2l5_u4-idHHAPRLksIRrhzhOBkKPWnPkaDGw2M9QsE94_AQaWc32qMk)
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Matt Staneck on June 05, 2020, 09:17:59 PM
The gulf here is a debate between "racism is primarily personal" v. "racism is primarily institutional."

The evidence I share here is coming from the perspective that racism is primarily institutional: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage)

M. Staneck
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 05, 2020, 09:36:13 PM
The gulf here is a debate between "racism is primarily personal" v. "racism is primarily institutional."

The evidence I share here is coming from the perspective that racism is primarily institutional: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/06/03/us/minneapolis-police-use-of-force.html?action=click&module=Spotlight&pgtype=Homepage)

M. Staneck
There is no evidence of any kind in that article because the number of instances of police use of force is correlated only to population. The relevant statistic would correlate that number to the number of arrests/police interactions, and further correlated to number of uncooperative interactions. Otherwise you have to assume that the populations commit crimes, live in high crime areas, or cooperate with the police at the same rate, which is not true. The paper that employs Nate Silver has no excuse for publishing this kind of statistical analysis other than that it supports a narrative, especially since comprehensive crime statistics flatly contradict that narrative.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 05, 2020, 10:16:00 PM
Eileen, I hope that you will join me in prayers that saner, cooler, more soulful heads will prevail at the higher levels of our government so that what is good, noble and hopeful about our great country will not be further damaged. We still have checks and balances - protections against misuse of presidential authority - in place. People who do have souls, are compassionate and live in the real world are out there and up there. May they speak and may they prevail.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 05, 2020, 10:39:47 PM
Foster children by definition have experienced trauma that is not their fault. One effect of that trauma is often problematic, destructive behaviors. Another effect is that is forces them to construct a personal narrative for their condition. Some think they must be very bad. Some think the system is out to get them. Some think they are just constantly victims of bad luck. Virtually never does their personal narrative line up with reality very well. But you can't live with the trauma without some attempt at explaining and understanding it. The question is what to do about it as a foster parent. It would be cruel to "debunk" the narrative that exists to provide the only sense of meaning and perhaps comfort the traumatized person has, at least not right away. But at some point the narrative becomes a big liability and has to be replaced with something that corresponds to the facts. And that can really hurt.

I know of one case where the kid thinks that Amazon won't deliver to his house because it is in a poor neighborhood. They take his mom's money but then never deliver the stuff. The reality is that his mom spends the money on drugs and tells him she ordered things for him on Amazon and it never came. He loves his mom, and she loves him, but addiction is a debilitating thing. Eventually he will learn that Amazon is not against him and that some of his family's problems were not externally imposed on them. But for now he needs to believe the story-- better some faceless corporation be at fault for their poverty than his mother's choices. But only for now.

The trauma experienced by the African American community historically is real and not their fault. But the predominant narrative constructed as a coping mechanism does not comport with reality. As more and more people dig into the data, the idea that police brutality and racism against black people is any kind of explanation for the ongoing problems in the black community will fall apart. That doesn't mean their condition is their fault. It means that falling back on "systemic racism" without tackling other issues head on eventually becomes an enabling and debilitating charade. 

 
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 05:10:28 AM
Today, from the paper people here don’t like, (but do you dispute the facts in it?) My emphasis added.
WASHINGTON — President Trump began his Friday by drawing criticism from Democrats for declaring that new unemployment numbers made it “a great day” for George Floyd, the black man whose death in the custody of white police officers has touched off protests and rioting across the country.
   He ended it by tweeting a video of a supporter declaring that Mr. Floyd was “not a good person.”
   After a week of unrest in the capital, Mr. Trump had gone to the Rose Garden to declare victory over a coronavirus pandemic that has ravaged the economy, promoting the new numbers and planning to carry that message with him on a trip to Maine later in the day. His jarring reference to Mr. Floyd, made during a speech centered on the economy, overshadowed it.
   “Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying this is a great thing that’s happening for our country,” Mr. Trump said. “This is a great day for him, it’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”
   Twelve hours later, the president tweeted a video of Candace Owens, a young black supporter who has questioned Mr. Floyd’s fitness as a “martyr” for the protests. “George Floyd was not a good person,” Ms. Owens said in that video. “I don’t care who wants to spin that.”
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 05:15:09 AM
From Episcopal Bishop Budde:
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/04/opinion/trump-st-johns-church-protests.html
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Eileen Smith on June 06, 2020, 09:23:54 AM
Eileen, I hope that you will join me in prayers that saner, cooler, more soulful heads will prevail at the higher levels of our government so that what is good, noble and hopeful about our great country will not be further damaged. We still have checks and balances - protections against misuse of presidential authority - in place. People who do have souls, are compassionate and live in the real world are out there and up there. May they speak and may they prevail.

Amen!  I am certainly with you in prayer. 
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 06, 2020, 09:59:08 AM
Today, from the paper people here don’t like, (but do you dispute the facts in it?) My emphasis added.
WASHINGTON — President Trump began his Friday by drawing criticism from Democrats for declaring that new unemployment numbers made it “a great day” for George Floyd, the black man whose death in the custody of white police officers has touched off protests and rioting across the country.
   He ended it by tweeting a video of a supporter declaring that Mr. Floyd was “not a good person.”
   After a week of unrest in the capital, Mr. Trump had gone to the Rose Garden to declare victory over a coronavirus pandemic that has ravaged the economy, promoting the new numbers and planning to carry that message with him on a trip to Maine later in the day. His jarring reference to Mr. Floyd, made during a speech centered on the economy, overshadowed it.
   “Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying this is a great thing that’s happening for our country,” Mr. Trump said. “This is a great day for him, it’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”
   Twelve hours later, the president tweeted a video of Candace Owens, a young black supporter who has questioned Mr. Floyd’s fitness as a “martyr” for the protests. “George Floyd was not a good person,” Ms. Owens said in that video. “I don’t care who wants to spin that.”
I dispute the part I bolded. I heard parts of his speech on the news and heard several people talking about the employment numbers yesterday, but didn't hear anyone talking about the president's comments about how Floyd would love these lower than expected unemployment numbers. What I bolded it not a fact, it is an attempt to control the national conversation by telling everyone what the focus should be on. The job numbers were so astoundingly good that any attempt to make it about Trump's little aside about how much Floyd would like those numbers is simply panic about the direction of the news cycle. But the official party line from WaPo and NYT is something they can always count on their loyal readers to parrot.

The other part I bolded is further proof the article is not interested in the news. What Trump tweeted about Candace Owen has nothing to do with his speech or the unemployment numbers. If it were a news story, it wouldn't introduce off-topic events. Or, if the story was simply about Trump did yesterday in general, it would say something more like, "At the end of the day, he tweeted out a video by Candace Owen, a young black woman who s critical of the protests and supportive of the president." By telling their readers that the really relevant thing about her video is that she said Floyd was not a good person, when anyone who watched the video would know that wasn't the point of the video nor even really accurate outside the context she gave for the statement, shows the incredible bias of the reporter.

Most of the articles you post here, Charles, should bear the simple headline, "Here is what we want you to think about Trump." And you fall for it time and time again. You hate that he makes everything about him, but you constantly go to news sources that make everything about him, and then repost links to those stories. And your thinking about Trump mirrors those sources precisely.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Steven W Bohler on June 06, 2020, 10:03:59 AM
Eileen, I hope that you will join me in prayers that saner, cooler, more soulful heads will prevail at the higher levels of our government so that what is good, noble and hopeful about our great country will not be further damaged. We still have checks and balances - protections against misuse of presidential authority - in place. People who do have souls, are compassionate and live in the real world are out there and up there. May they speak and may they prevail.

When you and Ms. Smith say that some people have no souls, you are engaging in something even worse than racism.  It removes those individuals from humanity altogether and excuses (or even enables) treating them as subhuman.  And, theologically, it removes them from the work of Christ.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 10:26:35 AM
Pastor Bohler writes:
And, theologically, it removes them from the work of Christ.

I comment:
Possibly, but we can always hope.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Steven W Bohler on June 06, 2020, 10:40:41 AM
Pastor Bohler writes:
And, theologically, it removes them from the work of Christ.

I comment:
Possibly, but we can always hope.

What does that mean?  You hope they are not removed from the work of Christ?  Did Jesus not die for Donald Trump?  Did He not pay for Donald Trump's sins?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 11:52:24 AM
It means, Pastor Bohler, That at the current time, I consider the matter of the president’s redemption or salvation not very important. But, yeah, I believe that Jesus died for his sins. So what?
And we digress. Your rabbit holes often have the name of theological constructs on the sign above them. But they are still rabbit holes. You dive in and pretty soon you are lost and forget what you were looking for in the first place. I’m  staying above ground.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Steven W Bohler on June 06, 2020, 12:37:49 PM
It means, Pastor Bohler, That at the current time, I consider the matter of the president’s redemption or salvation not very important. But, yeah, I believe that Jesus died for his sins. So what?
And we digress. Your rabbit holes often have the name of theological constructs on the sign above them. But they are still rabbit holes. You dive in and pretty soon you are lost and forget what you were looking for in the first place. I’m  staying above ground.

1. "That at the current time, I consider the matter of the president’s redemption or salvation not very important."  How appalling a comment to make!  But, that is precisely what I was saying above, about how such comments as "soul-less" enable us to devalue or write off others.

2. "But, yeah, I believe that Jesus died for his sins. So what?"  So what?  Maybe you should treat him as someone the Lord loves so highly that He would suffer hell for him.  Rather than say he is without a soul.

3. "And we digress." Sorry, I thought this was a THEOLOGICAL discussion group, rather than a political platform for you to spew your hatred of Donald Trump.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 06, 2020, 12:40:40 PM
This might explain why I heard snippets of Trump talking about jobs numbers and not having those remarks overshadowed by an aside about Floyd.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781

“Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender, or creed. They have to share fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it,” Trump said. “We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”

Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 02:30:26 PM
Pastor Bohler, you are not devoid of memory. So you might recall how many times I have said I do not hate the president. We pray for him constantly. But I’m not going to go into the details of his redemption and/or salvation in this modest forum. So please stop saying that I hate him.  8)
I did have a good idea, however, on how we could improve the statistics about police violence against African-Americans. Right now police violence against African-Americans is considerably higher than it is against white Americans.
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 06, 2020, 02:37:22 PM
Pastor Bohler, you are not devoid of memory. So you might recall how many times I have said I do not hate the president. We pray for him constantly. But I’m not going to go into the details of his redemption and/or salvation in this modest forum. So please stop saying that I hate him.  8)
I did have a good idea, however, on how we could improve the statistics about police violence against African-Americans. Right now police violence against African-Americans is considerably higher than it is against white Americans.
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.
So if the statistics showed that suspects resisting arrest are treated similarly regardless of the race of the officer or the race of the suspect, you would admit that the protests are barking up the wrong tree?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Brian Stoffregen on June 06, 2020, 02:49:21 PM
Pastor Bohler, you are not devoid of memory. So you might recall how many times I have said I do not hate the president. We pray for him constantly. But I’m not going to go into the details of his redemption and/or salvation in this modest forum. So please stop saying that I hate him.  8)
I did have a good idea, however, on how we could improve the statistics about police violence against African-Americans. Right now police violence against African-Americans is considerably higher than it is against white Americans.
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.
So if the statistics showed that suspects resisting arrest are treated similarly regardless of the race of the officer or the race of the suspect, you would admit that the protests are barking up the wrong tree?


A police officer's claim that a black man was resisting arrest and what the black man actually did are not necessarily the same thing. We've seen some videos of so-called resisting arrest claims. It looks like they were compliant.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Steven W Bohler on June 06, 2020, 03:12:58 PM
Pastor Bohler, you are not devoid of memory. So you might recall how many times I have said I do not hate the president. We pray for him constantly. But I’m not going to go into the details of his redemption and/or salvation in this modest forum. So please stop saying that I hate him.  8)
I did have a good idea, however, on how we could improve the statistics about police violence against African-Americans. Right now police violence against African-Americans is considerably higher than it is against white Americans.
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.

Yes, you continue to insist that you do not hate him.  But then you say he is without a soul (not to mention the other horrible things you have said about him).  And that you don't consider his salvation important.  Frankly, I do not know what worse things a person ever say about another.  But as long as you say that you do not hate him....
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Michael Slusser on June 06, 2020, 03:38:01 PM
This might explain why I heard snippets of Trump talking about jobs numbers and not having those remarks overshadowed by an aside about Floyd.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781

“Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender, or creed. They have to share fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it,” Trump said. “We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”

You're right. I went and listened to the whole speech and while there was just the one reference to Mr. Floyd at the beginning, and it came right after the President's basking in the unemployment statistics, he did not connect the two.

But why did the President think that Mr. Floyd in heaven would be "looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.” Was it the worldwide protests? Was it some societal or legal change that in fact brought about equality in America?

What did the President mean by saying, "It’s a great day for him"? It wasn't that white unemployment was going down, so what was it?

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James_Gale on June 06, 2020, 04:03:36 PM
This might explain why I heard snippets of Trump talking about jobs numbers and not having those remarks overshadowed by an aside about Floyd.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781 (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781)

“Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender, or creed. They have to share fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it,” Trump said. “We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”

You're right. I went and listened to the whole speech and while there was just the one reference to Mr. Floyd at the beginning, and it came right after the President's basking in the unemployment statistics, he did not connect the two.

But why did the President think that Mr. Floyd in heaven would be "looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.” Was it the worldwide protests? Was it some societal or legal change that in fact brought about equality in America?

What did the President mean by saying, "It’s a great day for him"? It wasn't that white unemployment was going down, so what was it?

Peace,
Michael


President Trump had moved on from talking about the economy to talking about the need for equal justice.  He at that point was pretty clearly talking about and indeed praising the protests.  It was in the context of discussing the protests for equal justice that Trump said that it was a great day for Mr. Floyd.


President Trump is all too often crude and graceless.  But the lies trafficked by the Washington Post and other unscrupulous media outlets also are at least as crude and graceless.   
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 06, 2020, 04:30:34 PM
Pastor Bohler, you are not devoid of memory. So you might recall how many times I have said I do not hate the president. We pray for him constantly. But I’m not going to go into the details of his redemption and/or salvation in this modest forum. So please stop saying that I hate him.  8)
I did have a good idea, however, on how we could improve the statistics about police violence against African-Americans. Right now police violence against African-Americans is considerably higher than it is against white Americans.
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.
So if the statistics showed that suspects resisting arrest are treated similarly regardless of the race of the officer or the race of the suspect, you would admit that the protests are barking up the wrong tree?
A police officer's claim that a black man was resisting arrest and what the black man actually did are not necessarily the same thing. We've seen some videos of so-called resisting arrest claims. It looks like they were compliant. <Emphasis added>
If only you provided concrete examples of ‘looks like they were compliant”.  Thus far all you have provided is baseless unfounded speculation concocted in an attempt to support your view. 


If indeed you have “seen videos” that really support your point of view, provide the links! Without the links it is just another of your rabbit holes.😢

Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 05:00:23 PM
Peter, and Pastor Bohler: my comment on how police violence statistics could be “better“ was a dark humor joke. It was not something I posed for discussion here.
And Pastor Bohler, I dearly and devoutly wish that the Holy Spirit grabbed the president by his neck and suddenly and miraculously bring him to the faith, that faith being a liberal Christianity. Or that he has a Damascus Road experience on the 13th hole of one of his golf course. That would be terrific. But I don’t see much sense in discussing his eternal soul when we are talking about the realities of today’s politics.
Oh wait! Did I say he has a soul? Golly Gee, I guess I did. I’ll have to think about that.
(Leave it to this crowd to see a heaven or hell discussion in any topic.  We could be discussing the relative merits of belts or suspenders and... And leave it to this crowd to miss the normal nuances of the English language. Refer to someone as “soulless” and normally you are talking about how they act here on earth, not their eternal salvation.)
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Richard Johnson on June 06, 2020, 05:06:21 PM

President Trump had moved on from talking about the economy to talking about the need for equal justice.  He at that point was pretty clearly talking about and indeed praising the protests.  It was in the context of discussing the protests for equal justice that Trump said that it was a great day for Mr. Floyd.


President Trump is all too often crude and graceless.  But the lies trafficked by the Washington Post and other unscrupulous media outlets also are at least as crude and graceless.

I watched the whole thing, and I'd say it was tough to say just what the "context" was for his remark about Mr. Floyd. His rambling stream of consciousness made very little sense. But why would he inject something about "the need for equal justice" in a talk that was otherwise about the wonderful way he is handling the economy if he didn't mean to connect the two?
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 06, 2020, 05:12:54 PM
So here’s my solution.The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.
That will even out the statistics and things won’t appear to be so bad.
This statement is indicates moral deviancy beyond belief .. and totally devoid of any scriptural basis ... unless your bible contains Hezekiah 3:15 ‘Two wrongs make a right’.

It is absolutely abhorrent that a one who claims to be a christian would, even in jest, even speak of unwarranted violence ... it makes about as much sense as saying ‘Beat the crap out of more cats to make Rev Austin happy.’

Yes ... a very boorish statement ... but no worse than ‘So here’s my solution. The police simply have to start beating the crap out of more white suspects, and shooting more unarmed white suspects.’  Appalling beyond belief.😖
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 05:38:42 PM
What part of “dark humor joke” is hard for you to understand, James?
All of it, I guess. Ask a 12-year old to explain it to you before you start hurling around words like “moral deviancy”.
Good grief!
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James_Gale on June 06, 2020, 05:51:16 PM

President Trump had moved on from talking about the economy to talking about the need for equal justice.  He at that point was pretty clearly talking about and indeed praising the protests.  It was in the context of discussing the protests for equal justice that Trump said that it was a great day for Mr. Floyd.


President Trump is all too often crude and graceless.  But the lies trafficked by the Washington Post and other unscrupulous media outlets also are at least as crude and graceless.

I watched the whole thing, and I'd say it was tough to say just what the "context" was for his remark about Mr. Floyd. His rambling stream of consciousness made very little sense. But why would he inject something about "the need for equal justice" in a talk that was otherwise about the wonderful way he is handling the economy if he didn't mean to connect the two?


That has happened regularly with politicians of all stripes.  They frequently address pressing matters unrelated to the principal topic.


Donald Trump could never be called eloquent. He often isn’t even coherent. But that doesn’t justify the media practice of distorting his words beyond the bounds of their plausible meaning, all in service, not of factual reporting, but of a political narrative and agenda.


(And yes, Fox News has been doing the same thing to VP Biden.)
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 06:00:24 PM
Does it occur to you that his incoherence, his ineptness with words, his inability to stay focused, his lack of awareness is indeed part of the news?
No speech writer connected Mr. Floyd’s death with a slight increase in jobs (which turned out to be a lie), but he did. Why?
Several reasons, all of them quite disturbing, easily come to mind.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 06, 2020, 06:25:41 PM
Does it occur to you that his incoherence, his ineptness with words, his inability to stay focused, his lack of awareness is indeed part of the news?
No speech writer connected Mr. Floyd’s death with a slight increase in jobs (which turned out to be a lie), but he did. Why?
Several reasons, all of them quite disturbing, easily come to mind.
It amazes me how you think someone with that degree of incompetence defeated both party establishments and won the presidency. Ask Bloomberg how easy it is to buy the office. What you’re left with is your own settled view of Trump intact and a view that millions of Americans must be hateful bigots or unable to notice complete incoherence. That you might be fundamentally wrong about a lot of things never seems to occur to you.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 07:05:23 PM
Au contraire, Peter. I believe I may be wrong about many things.  But not about this President.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 06, 2020, 07:35:05 PM
Au contraire, Peter. I believe I may be wrong about many things.  But not about this President.
Fair enough. But you ought to be aware that your posts concerning him very obviously come from a closed mind.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Robert Johnson on June 06, 2020, 07:45:33 PM
(And yes, Fox News has been doing the same thing to VP Biden.)

No one has to do anything to make Biden appear incoherent.  Indeed, much editing work must be done to make him appear to be able to think at all.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 06, 2020, 08:35:33 PM
Yes, Peter. Now my mind is closed because I have made a decision. For a long time I gave the president the benefit of the doubt even though I did not support him. I thought he was not very smart and inept at being a president 
But then, I came to the conclusion that he is dangerous. In many ways.
So, yes, on the matter of the President, my mind is closed.
Yours seems to be closed on President Obama.
Robert Johnson’s mind is closed on Mr. Biden
Other minds here are closed on anyone running as a Democrat.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Steven Tibbetts on June 06, 2020, 08:41:56 PM
For a long time I gave the president the benefit of the doubt even though I did not support him.


Gee, it might have been nice if you had shown that once or twice on this forum.

Or is this another of your whimsical comments?

Fraternally, Steven+
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Weedon on June 06, 2020, 08:54:08 PM
What Steven said. Never seen the first evidence of it.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Michael Slusser on June 06, 2020, 11:11:47 PM
This might explain why I heard snippets of Trump talking about jobs numbers and not having those remarks overshadowed by an aside about Floyd.

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781 (https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/matt-margolis/2020/06/05/fake-news-media-falsely-claim-trump-invoked-george-floyd-when-discussing-jobs-report-n500781)

“Equal justice under the law must mean that every American receives equal treatment in every encounter with law enforcement regardless of race, color, gender, or creed. They have to share fair treatment from law enforcement. They have to receive it,” Trump said. “We all saw what happened last week. We can’t let that happen. Hopefully, George is looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.”

You're right. I went and listened to the whole speech and while there was just the one reference to Mr. Floyd at the beginning, and it came right after the President's basking in the unemployment statistics, he did not connect the two.

But why did the President think that Mr. Floyd in heaven would be "looking down right now and saying ‘this is a great thing that’s happening for our country.’ It’s a great day for him. It’s a great day for everybody. This is a great day for everybody. This is a great, great day in terms of equality.” Was it the worldwide protests? Was it some societal or legal change that in fact brought about equality in America?

What did the President mean by saying, "It’s a great day for him"? It wasn't that white unemployment was going down, so what was it?

President Trump had moved on from talking about the economy to talking about the need for equal justice.  He at that point was pretty clearly talking about and indeed praising the protests.  It was in the context of discussing the protests for equal justice that Trump said that it was a great day for Mr. Floyd.

President Trump is all too often crude and graceless.  But the lies trafficked by the Washington Post and other unscrupulous media outlets also are at least as crude and graceless.
In other words, the President was  describing the worldwide protests (including the ones in this country) as the great day for Mr. Floyd and for everybody, because they were doing so much for equality?

That seems to be what you're saying. It takes me aback, because the President has never showed enthusiasm for protests before (unless they were part of his campaign rallies, or directed against Democrats like Governor Whitmer of Michigan). He certainly appeared to be vigorously opposed to the rallies that were taking place at the time of his speech.

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 07, 2020, 12:04:19 AM
What part of “dark humor joke” is hard for you to understand, James?
All of it, I guess. Ask a 12-year old to explain it to you before you start hurling around words like “moral deviancy”.
Good grief!
I wouldn’t dare expose a 12 year old to that tripe ... my guess is in some locales words such as that would be considered too indecent for a 12 year old ... but carry on .. 😞
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 07, 2020, 06:11:19 AM
Larry Fitzgerald, Jr. writes a loving, positive, hopeful, yet honest and pained view of Minneapolis and the United States as an African-American man who grew up in the midwestern City. He’s a wide receiver for the Arizona Cardinals and was selected for the Pro Bowl 11 times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/sports/football/george-floyd-nfl-players-fitzgerald.html
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 07, 2020, 08:38:09 AM
Larry Fitzgerald, Jr. writes a loving, positive, hopeful, yet honest and pained view of Minneapolis and the United States as an African-American man who grew up in the midwestern City. He’s a wide receiver for the Arizona Cardinals and was selected for the Pro Bowl 11 times.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/07/sports/football/george-floyd-nfl-players-fitzgerald.html
Great article. Even though Fitzgerald has personally been responsible for two heartbreaking, overtime playoff losses for the Packers, he is someone I’ve never heard any fan of any team have anything negative to say about. I think his point about comparing things to an intimate relationship, and people getting hurtful with each other when they don’t feel they’re being listened to or understood is worth pondering. And it is a hopeful analogy because it hinges on the fact that hurt isn’t caused by a broken relationship entirely but by broken communication with it.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 07, 2020, 01:04:05 PM
At the same time the NYT times was desperately apologizing for publishing an op-ed by Senator Cotton, they were also publishing an op-ed by Chad Sanders, a black man who advises his white friends to send money to various progressive causes and texts for the following purpose:

Texts: To your relatives and loved ones telling them you will not be visiting them or answering phone calls until they take significant action in supporting black lives either through protest or financial contributions.

Finally, an idea everyone can get behind! If you have relatives whose socio-political views are more important to them than you are, they are almost assuredly the very same relatives you've been wishing would leave you alone anyway. With this advice, everybody wins. In fact, I think radio stations should run this columnist's advice as a public service. I'll bet everyone from Rush Limbaugh to NPR would gladly air it.

"Are you the sort of person who takes seriously the annual advice you get about how to endure your relatives over Thanksgiving dinner, blissfully unaware that you are the only one at the table being patiently endured? Are you related to people who show no interest in sanctimonious neo-Marxist theory no matter how often you bring it up? Do you dutifully change your facebook profile pic to whatever the official cause du jour is only to look on aghast that so many of your relatives are leaving theirs the same as it was, as though their wedding were more important than societal change? Do you support Colin Kaepernick despite not having had any idea who he was until he started protesting the National Anthem, but find your relatives would rather talk about football? Well, you've suffered, and been suffered, long enough! Please, for the sake of public safety, sanity, and the future of America, stop talking! It's that simple! Let your unwoke relations sleep on rather than forcing them to pretend to care about your deconstructionist Utopian ideals just to maintain a relationship with you. If you've been looking for some concrete step you personally can take to improve society, and if you are a PC culture warrior tired of battling your family, by all means, do yourself and everyone in your life a favor and reserve the privilege of interacting with you to those who pass your socio-political litmus test." This message brought to you by literally everyone.       
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 07, 2020, 02:44:04 PM
At the same time the NYT times was desperately apologizing for publishing an op-ed by Senator Cotton, they were also publishing an op-ed by Chad Sanders, and black man who advises his white friends to send money to various progressive causes and texts for the following purpose:

Texts: To your relatives and loved ones telling them you will not be visiting them or answering phone calls until they take significant action in supporting black lives either through protest or financial contributions.

Finally, an idea everyone can get behind! If you have relatives whose socio-political views are more important to them than you are, they are almost assuredly the very same relatives you've been wishing would leave you alone anyway. With this advice, everybody wins. In fact, I think radio stations should run this columnist's advice as a public service. I'll bet everyone from Rush Limbaugh to NPR would gladly air it.

"Are you the sort of person who takes seriously the annual advice you get about how to endure your relatives over Thanksgiving dinner, blissfully unaware that you are the only one at the table being patiently endured? Are you related to people who show no interest in sanctimonious neo-Marxist theory no matter how often you bring it up? Do you dutifully change your facebook profile pic to whatever the official cause du jour is only to look on aghast that so many of your relatives are leaving theirs the same as it was, as though their wedding were more important than societal change? Do you support Colin Kaepernick despite not having had any idea who he was until he started protesting the National Anthem, but find your relatives would rather talk about football? Well, you've suffered, and been suffered, long enough! Please, for the sake of public safety, sanity, and the future of America, stop talking! It's that simple! Let your unwoke relations sleep on rather than forcing them to pretend to care about your deconstructionist Utopian ideals just to maintain a relationship with you. If you've been looking for some concrete step you personally can take to improve society, and if you are a PC culture warrior tired of battling your family, by all means, do yourself and everyone in your life a favor and reserve the privilege of interacting with you to those who pass your socio-political litmus test." This message brought to you by literally everyone.       
That the NY Times would apologize for publishing an OpEd is telling ... appalling .. and honest ... telling because they tell the world that even when it comes to OpEd so, they have a biased agenda that must be adhered to ... appalling because if their OpEd content is so tightly controlled to the official religion of the NY Times, imagine how much closer control is exerted on the "news" that should be fair and balanced ... and finally honest in they admit they do not honestly report the news  .. but sadly only publish the news from their totally biased point of view.


Full disclosure ... for a few years in the '80's I supervised the printing and distribution of the NY Times at a printing facility far far away from NY City.😷
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Charles Austin on June 07, 2020, 03:12:02 PM
James, your rush to judgment is insufferable and not very smart.
If you had read all that was written about why the paper apologized for printing that opinion piece, you would see - if you had even half an open mind - that it had nothing to do with the ideology expressed, but with quite a number of other things that have to do with honesty and integrity, proper editorial review and sensitivity to what’s going on in the country.
And your suggestion that There is an exact parallel between the policies of the editorial and op-Ed pages and the news pages Is so wrong and  inept that I’m not sure you ought to be reading newspapers.
If it appears that a newspaper is printing what you consider to be negative things about particular politician, then you might take a look at the larger picture. The newspaper is not making these things up. They are actually being said. Consider the article today that said former President Bush, Mitt Romney and at least a few other Republicans are considering opposing the reelection of the president. The Times did not make that up.It actually happened. Now let’s see what Fox News, or the Washington Times, or the federalist have to say about that development. If they even mention it.
Note to all: I am trying very hard not to respond to what “James” writes, but some things  are so far beyond the pale that they insist upon comment.
And another note on one of my major concerns about this modest forum. It now appears that at least one participant here knows exactly who this poster is. That sets another awkward and unfair dynamic into the discussion.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James_Gale on June 07, 2020, 03:13:34 PM

As we all know, Donald Trump is vulnerable to attack from any number of perspectives.  He is very good at providing ammunition to his opponents.  That said, Joe Biden is also accomplished at inflicted wounds on himself.  For example, while Biden will most assuredly win large majorities among black voters, the size of those majorities may well be reduced by his own long history of comments that sound at least vaguely racist.


After the nomination process is complete, I'd expect a barrage of anti-Biden ads that contrast the criminal-justice reform bill that Trump championed and signed with the very, very long litany of Biden statements in support of locking up inner-city folks.  I'd expect those ads to feature recordings of Biden's passionate speeches running on top of montages of peaceful protestors and of overjoyed people who won their freedom under the Trump-signed reform law.


Here are some of the Biden quotes and actions:

"It doesn't matter whether or not they're the victims of society.  The end result is that they're about to knock my mother on the head with a lead pipe, shoot my sister, beat up my wife, take on my sons.  So I don't want to ask what made them do this.  They must be taken off the street."


"Let the FBI buy weapons as powerful and the drug cartels have."


Biden opposed judicial discretion in sentencing of those who "do not meet the middle class criteria of susceptibility to rehabilitation."  Biden said, "They are beyond the pale, many of those people.  They have literally not been socialized.  They are in jail, away from my mother . . . our families."


Biden was lead sponsor of a bill to add more than 60 new death-penalty crimes to federal law.  (He was in a bidding war of sorts with Strom Thurmond to see who could add more.)


In 1994, Biden said, "When I wrote the original bill that started this whole process, the so-called Biden crime bill, I didn't call a liberal confab . . . or Big Society people, I called the cops."


Biden sponsored legislation for evening programs in inner cities.  On the Senate floor, he said this:  "They started looking at [these programs] and found out that this midnight basketball isn't getting them together a bunch of jive folks who are black, white, and hispanic and living in the inner city to . . . try and see if they can be Michael Jordan.  What they found out, they were keeping schools open, so gangs come off streets instead of out raping my mother, marauding me, robbing the local store. They're in a gymnasium [instead].  And my daughter will be safer, my wife will be safer, my mother will be safer, and I will be safer.  And I will be happy."


Here's a video that includes these quotes and more.  Link (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Cc0QxwXnQ4&feature=emb_title)


The point here is not that Trump is good and Biden is bad.  The point is that both are very much vulnerable to effective attacks (both honest and unfair).


The next months will be nasty and not at all uplifting.  If only we could look forward to a decidedly more dignified fall.  But campaigns these days don't come cloaked in dignity.  And in 2020, it seems that anything that could go badly ends up being even worse than any of us could have imagined.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: James J Eivan on June 08, 2020, 01:49:42 AM
James, your rush to judgment is insufferable and not very smart.
If you had read all that was written about why the paper apologized for printing that opinion piece, you would see - if you had even half an open mind - that it had nothing to do with the ideology expressed, but with quite a number of other things that have to do with honesty and integrity, proper editorial review and sensitivity to what’s going on in the country.
And your suggestion that There is an exact parallel between the policies of the editorial and op-Ed pages and the news pages Is so wrong and  inept that I’m not sure you ought to be reading newspapers.
If it appears that a newspaper is printing what you consider to be negative things about particular politician, then you might take a look at the larger picture. The newspaper is not making these things up. They are actually being said. Consider the article today that said former President Bush, Mitt Romney and at least a few other Republicans are considering opposing the reelection of the president. The Times did not make that up.It actually happened. Now let’s see what Fox News, or the Washington Times, or the federalist have to say about that development. If they even mention it.
It seems rather hypocritical for you criticize other media outlets saying “if they even mention it”  at the same time your defend ‘your newspaper’ for terminating an editor for failing to support the ‘mission’ of the media.

Apparently you feel that the your media’s responsibility is to be the news ... not to report all the news that is fit to print.  By defending the dismissal of The NY Times editor you have changed the slogan to read “all the news that supports our mission” but carry on as you have been carrying on in the past.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Michael Slusser on June 08, 2020, 02:55:49 PM
This popped up on my news feed:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/gofundme-suspends-candace-owens-fundraiser-alabama-bar (https://www.foxnews.com/us/gofundme-suspends-candace-owens-fundraiser-alabama-bar)

Quote
GoFundMe suspended a fundraiser by Candace Owens on Saturday created to help an Alabama bar following controversial comments made by its owner about George Floyd and protesters, according to multiple reports.

Owens, a conservative political activist, expressed her support and helped raise more than $200,000 for Birmingham’s Parkside Cafe. Its co-owner, Michael Dykes, had previously said Floyd was a “thug” and that protesters were “idiots” in a text message that was posted online, AL.com reported.

Owens, in a Facebook status, stated that she was helping the “already-struggling business” after Dykes’ comments led to a boycott.

"After raising $205,000 in a few hours @gofundme decided to halt my campaign for the Parkside Cafe in Alabama. At their discretion, they deemed that funds raised for a conservative business constitutes “intolerance” They WILL however give the funds raised thus far to the cafe..." Owens wrote on Twitter.

Peace,
Michael
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: peter_speckhard on June 08, 2020, 03:11:57 PM
This popped up on my news feed:
https://www.foxnews.com/us/gofundme-suspends-candace-owens-fundraiser-alabama-bar (https://www.foxnews.com/us/gofundme-suspends-candace-owens-fundraiser-alabama-bar)

Quote
GoFundMe suspended a fundraiser by Candace Owens on Saturday created to help an Alabama bar following controversial comments made by its owner about George Floyd and protesters, according to multiple reports.

Owens, a conservative political activist, expressed her support and helped raise more than $200,000 for Birmingham’s Parkside Cafe. Its co-owner, Michael Dykes, had previously said Floyd was a “thug” and that protesters were “idiots” in a text message that was posted online, AL.com reported.

Owens, in a Facebook status, stated that she was helping the “already-struggling business” after Dykes’ comments led to a boycott.

"After raising $205,000 in a few hours @gofundme decided to halt my campaign for the Parkside Cafe in Alabama. At their discretion, they deemed that funds raised for a conservative business constitutes “intolerance” They WILL however give the funds raised thus far to the cafe..." Owens wrote on Twitter.

Peace,
Michael
GoFundMe is not a very secure way to donate to things anyway. And now that I know they have to approve of the things I might fund, well, that's a tad Orwellian.

"Thug" is a complicated word; to treat it as a insult is to endorse British Imperialism. Normally it just refers to violent, lawless people. Since Floyd was an established criminal on meth and had the cops called on him, I think referring to him as a "thug" is within the bounds of reason if not necessarily in good taste. The point, of course, is that what happened to him shouldn't have happened even if he was a thug. As to whether the protesters were idiots, assuming he wasn't using the term in a technical sense of actual IQ measurements but in the more common sense in which people engaged in stupid activities are often referred to as idiots. Certainly many of them were caught on camera doing inexcusably stupid and counterproductive things, so even if the characterization wasn't fair, it was certainly expressing a common sentiment.

The next progressive Civil War will be how come GoFundMe is more woke than the social media services that allowed Dykes and Owens to disseminate their message.
Title: Re: Candace Owens video. Thoughts?
Post by: Michael Slusser on June 08, 2020, 04:18:15 PM
More of the story behind Candace Owens' GoFundMe project:
(https://www.al.com/life/2020/06/birmingham-bar-in-turmoil-after-owner-slams-george-floyd-protests.html)
It's an interesting read. Here's a couple of topic paragraphs:

Quote
Michael Dykes, the founder of Parkside Cafe in Avondale, called Floyd a “thug” and said protesters were “idiots” in a text message that was sent on Friday morning to Robert Bagwell, co-owner of the bar, and one of Parkside’s employees. Dykes said Parkside should increase prices at the bar as a “protest tax” and employees who participated in the protests should resign.

“We should go up one or two dollars on everything until June 10th. Call it a protest tax because all the idiots that went to the protests are responsible for us not being able to open normal hours,” Dykes said in the text, referring to a 7 p.m. curfew in Birmingham that was imposed on June 1 after protests here spurred violence downtown. “Any employees that went or are going should resign," Dykes said. "Mr. Floyd was a thug, didn’t deserve to die but honoring a thug is irresponsible.”
https://www.al.com/life/2020/06/birmingham-bar-in-turmoil-after-owner-slams-george-floyd-protests.html (https://www.al.com/life/2020/06/birmingham-bar-in-turmoil-after-owner-slams-george-floyd-protests.html)

Peace,
Michael