(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

Quote: You are saying their[sic] is maybe more to them then just the racism.

Exactly. And from what I gather you are saying they should be judged solely on racism - thus confirming what I said about the left having only one thing to judge people on. Racists bad, nonracists good, not matter what else they may do or believe. Thanks for confirming that for me yet again.

(01-13-2020 04:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think anybody denies that there were Nazi sympathizers and white supremacists in the march against destruction of the statues. What I haven't seen is anyone willing to admit that there were evil people on the other side.

This was not good vs. bad. It was bad vs. bad, with maybe some hangers-on on both sides.

Sounds juicier when you ascribe the killing to the march.

Kind of fits in with the dork level ascribation of the Air Ukraine shootdown to Trump.

(01-13-2020 04:27 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 04:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I don't think anybody denies that there were Nazi sympathizers and white supremacists in the march against destruction of the statues. What I haven't seen is anyone willing to admit that there were evil people on the other side.

This was not good vs. bad. It was bad vs. bad, with maybe some hangers-on on both sides.

I highly doubt that, given how many times we've talked about this, and there clearly were some awful people representing the other side that were just looking for a fight.

I think people have likely pushed back about saying it was just bad vs bad, or that one side was more in the right than the other, but not been unwilling to say that ****** people were part of the counter protest.

You yourself went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in. Strikingly worse iirc.

Was that before or after your painstaking defense of it is far worse to go to meeting where foreign info is offered than seeking foreign info? I forget.

The 'nuanced' lines you draw all seem to blur with one another after a time.

(01-13-2020 05:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Kind of fits in with the dork level ascribation of the Air Ukraine shootdown to Trump.

But now it looks like the unrest in Iran is expanding over the airliner shootdown. Suppose it led to regime change. Would democrats then argue that Trump had nothing to do with shooting it down?

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

Quote: You are saying their[sic] is maybe more to them then just the racism.

Exactly. And from what I gather you are saying they should be judged solely on racism - thus confirming what I said about the left having only one thing to judge people on. Racists bad, nonracists good, not matter what else they may do or believe. Thanks for confirming that for me yet again.

You're failing basic logic if you think that someone believing a racist person is bad means that not being racist is an automatic qualifier for being a good person.

(01-13-2020 05:15 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

Quote: You are saying their[sic] is maybe more to them then just the racism.

Exactly. And from what I gather you are saying they should be judged solely on racism - thus confirming what I said about the left having only one thing to judge people on. Racists bad, nonracists good, not matter what else they may do or believe. Thanks for confirming that for me yet again.

You're failing basic logic if you think that someone believing a racist person is bad means that not being racist is an automatic qualifier for being a good person.

Of course --- have to leave room for any other automatic progressive tripwires and lines in the sand. Stands to reason.

(01-13-2020 05:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Kind of fits in with the dork level ascribation of the Air Ukraine shootdown to Trump.

But now it looks like the unrest in Iran is expanding over the airliner shutdown. Suppose it led to regime change. Would democrats then argue that Trump had nothing to do with shooting it down?

Governments shutdown; airliners are shot down.

Republicans are always responsible for both.

Trump successfully droned one of the biggest dirtbags on the planet. And he allowed the Iranians to save face with a retaliatory attack that blew up sand, and some tents.

The Democrats then focus on the rightful, perhaps correct, limitation of executive war powers via the legislative process.

Democrats might direct some of the energy on the Iranian focus to, perhaps, express any solidarity with or backing of the protesters calling out the Iranian regime's lies.

They have not, and they continue not to.

(01-13-2020 05:34 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:14 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 05:06 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  Kind of fits in with the dork level ascribation of the Air Ukraine shootdown to Trump.

But now it looks like the unrest in Iran is expanding over the airliner shutdown. Suppose it led to regime change. Would democrats then argue that Trump had nothing to do with shooting it down?

Governments shutdown; airliners are shot down.
Republicans are always responsible for both.

Damn spellcheck. Fixed.

I just find it odd how often people deny a belief, and then demonstrate it.


IMO, being a racist/white supremacist is a belief system. Boiling it down to its simplest form, it is the belief that whites are superior and other races are inferior. I believe you can still be an overall good person with this belief system. Thinking UH grads are categorically inferior to Rice grads or that Christian's have it right and nobody else does isn't, in and of itself, anything other than limiting to ones-self. It means you miss out on a whole lot of good people in this world based on a false belief.

Where people go off the rails is when that belief turns into actions designed to harm that group. It can be anything from only choosing to frequent establishments owned by whites to ordering the killing of 6 million Jewish people, and there is a whole lot in between those two points... Some of which I suspect those others are just as happy not to have you in their establishment, and others of which are abhorrent.

The left has repeatedly conflated opposition to ILLEGAL immigrants (people who break the laws to enter this country) to Immigrants because it furthers their political goals. You know who else does this? White supremacists.

Quote:You yourself [Lad] went out of your way to state the case that bashing someone's head in while being a racist is a *far* more abhorrent act than simply bashing someone's head in.

That is the rationale for hate crimes - committing a crime with the wrong attitude.

Wrongthink is punishable.

(01-13-2020 01:27 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  I haven't seen much evidence of fine people on either side. Then again, I haven't studied the issue thoroughly.

Odds are, there were some non-evil people drawn in on both sides, these things have a way of happening that way.

I don't understand comments like this. You might as well write - "I didn't look for any facts and I don't know much about it, but here is my opinion anyway!" That is very unlike the majority of your posts where you typically have a lot of facts supporting your opinions.

Proof of fine people counter-protesting against the white supremacists:

(01-13-2020 01:21 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Willie Brown makes or breaks you as a democrat politician in California. He is the ultimate kingmaker. It is pretty well established that she carried on an affair with him during a time when her career advanced rapidly. You may not see the connection, but I think most people do.

And comments made in a workplace context are vastly different from those made in a public forum about a public figure.

You may think she is a fine upstanding human being. That's your right. I don't.

I don't know anything about California politics and I have never heard the name Willie Brown until you brought it up regarding Senator Harris. I really don't know much about Senator Harris at all and I never said anything about her being a fine upstanding human being. I was not ever high on her as a candidate based on her debate performances. Decency is decency, whether in the workplace or talking/writing about public figures.

(01-13-2020 04:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What I haven't seen is anyone willing to admit that there were evil people on the other side.

Ahem:

(01-10-2020 06:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  So the problem with your defense is that there were not very fine people on both sides. One side was all bad people. The other side had a few bad people and a lot of peaceful counter-protesters.

(01-13-2020 02:59 AM)mrbig Wrote:  Moreover, I already acknowledged there were bad people on both sides. Antifa sucks. White supremacists and Nazis and anti-Semites suck.

(01-13-2020 12:30 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I agree with Trump that both sides had bad people.

Not difficult to google. (Look at me, all modern and everything)

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/poli...695143002/

""I have also helped the careers of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, Gov. Gavin Newsom, Sen. Dianne Feinstein and a host of other politicians," he added."

I don't really care. I think probably all top politicians have accepted help from unsavory sources at one point or another. I didn't like her policy stances.

yesterday's news.

(01-13-2020 05:04 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:23 PM)mrbig Wrote:  What a weird hill to defend.

Yes, defending the Constitutional rights of people in the minority of opinion is a very strange hill to defend.

THIS IS NOT WHAT YOU ARE DOING AND THIS IS NOT WHAT THE CONVERSATION HAS BEEN ABOUT AT ANY POINT IN THE LAST FEW DAYS. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to engage in free speech. At no time have I attacked the Constitutional right of the white supremacists and nazis to peaceably assemble.

Don't try and morph this discussion into "mrbig is attacking the Constitution" because at no time has that been what this discussion has been about.

Honestly, I give up on this one. Have fun defending racists. Our country is worse for it.

(01-13-2020 04:53 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 01:11 PM)mrbig Wrote:  you are projecting some assumptions onto her conduct. Which is exactly what the Fourth Circuit says was wrong.

OK for Big to project some assumptions on the marchers, but not this?

What assumptions am I projecting? The march was literally organized by white supremacists. Multiple multiple groups that participated were admitted white supremacists, nazis, and anti-semites. I don't need to project anything.

I am honestly, truly, and somewhat hopelessly shocked that we have multiple decent people on here defending the racists and white supremacists. And to be clear, unless I missed something, I don't recall Tanq or 69/70/75 posting anything that I view as defending the racists or white supremacists, so I don't want to lump them in.

(01-14-2020 10:36 AM)mrbig Wrote:  

(01-13-2020 04:19 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  What I haven't seen is anyone willing to admit that there were evil people on the other side.

Ahem:

(01-10-2020 06:18 PM)mrbig Wrote:  So the problem with your defense is that there were not very fine people on both sides. One side was all bad people. The other side had a few bad people and a lot of peaceful counter-protesters.

(01-13-2020 02:59 AM)mrbig Wrote:  Moreover, I already acknowledged there were bad people on both sides. Antifa sucks. White supremacists and Nazis and anti-Semites suck.

(01-13-2020 12:30 PM)mrbig Wrote:  I agree with Trump that both sides had bad people.

who was on each side other than the bad people? i believe that you think there was nobody on one side who wasn't bad. Of course, you are using the usual single point of reference of racism for determining good/bad. You are also using suspect logic to determine that everybody on one side was racist.

I think some of those on your bad side would willingly risk their life to save somebody from a burning house. Just an opinion. Your opinion seems to be that, even if they did, they would still be bad people. Because good/bad is determined on a single point.

AFAIAC, this is as illogical as the belief that one race is superior to all others. But if somebody runs into a burning house to save a baby, I will award them a medal without making them take a purity test. And I don't think bad people should get medals.

(01-14-2020 10:49 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  who was on each side other than the bad people? i believe that you think there was nobody on one side who wasn't bad. Of course, you are using the usual single point of reference of racism for determining good/bad. You are also using suspect logic to determine that everybody on one side was racist.

I think some of those on your bad side would willingly risk their life to save somebody from a burning house. Just an opinion. Your opinion seems to be that, even if they did, they would still be bad people. Because good/bad is determined on a single point.

AFAIAC, this is as illogical as the belief that one race is superior to all others. But if somebody runs into a burning house to save a baby, I will award them a medal without making them take a purity test. And I don't think bad people should get medals.

Two quick points, because honestly this discussion has been pretty disheartening and eye-opening for me.

First, I'm just using Trump's words. He said there were "very fine people" on both sides and he used the word "bad" to describe people six times during his post-Charlottesville remarks. If you have a problem with "bad" or want a definition of "bad" in this context, go argue with Trump, not me. I just assumed he was talking about the white supremacists and Nazis. If you disagree with Trump that they are bad, then whatever. Stop arguing with me about it and go argue with Trump.

Second, I'm using a single point of reference because that is all I have and that is really all Trump had when he used the word six times. You give some great hypotheticals about the racist running into the burning house to save someone or treating his mom real nice. That is all great, but I'm just going with the facts I have. These dudes marched at a rally chock-full of white supremacists, racists, nazis, and anti-semites. With that as my only data point and Trump calling them bad, I'm OK with my default position being that they are bad. Again, if you disagree, go argue with Trump.

I am really and truly done with the Charlottesville / "very fine people on both sides" discussion. I will not be responding to any more comments on the topic.

OOwl, please correct me if I'm wrong.

You are arguing that being a white supremacist doesn't mean one is racist or a bad person.