Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[facilitatorn]

Medgar Evers on the dollar bill and Harriet Tubman on the twenty. That’s the money this country needs now.

[facilitatorn]

http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2021/jun/14/us-food-banks-unemployment-republican-states-pandemic

The way we teach our history in most cases has given some people terrible ideas about what they can get away with as governors in terms of screwing their constituents.

It’s not morals guiding these decisions. It’s sadism and avarice in drag. 

[Hamilton Samuels]

Repeating a strawman doesn’t make it a valid point. Maher’s argument apparently is that people on the LEFT!!!!! are somehow fearful of acknowledging that progress has been made. Which people? Some hot-take talking clown (much like Maher) who likes to say things just to get a reaction? It’s a strawman argument because nobody seriously argues that progress has not been made, but plenty do argue seriously not enough and not fast enough.

Maher misses that. And so, apparently, do you. But hey you can keep arguing with Knicks. So go for it.

Saying that White power and privilege is at an all-time high is just ridiculous.

Apparently you agree with that premise, and that is what he was discussing.

But nice to see you join the cabal and ride to the rescue trying to protect the poor innocent put-upon fellow whom you must think can't seem muster an argument by himself.

[Hamilton Samuels]

I consider myself on the LEFT and did not feel chastised at all by Maher.

I'm not sure he pigeon-holed the left as much as he did the unconscious far too woke.

BINGO!!!

The message was pretty fucking clear. Maher was skewering the excessively woke idiots, but the easily offended here overreacted as they so often do.

[Yankguy1]

That you still don't understand what a strawman is doesn't surprise me.    But thank God you no longer feel compelled to call Bankshot a child molester.

[Hamilton Samuels]

I think if you listen to Maher, and I've watched him pretty regularly for 15+ years, on our 2-party model, he's more or less on a liberal Dem side of the balance on most issues.

But even if he were just a pot-smoking libertarian, rich white guy, he had an opinion that was open to discussion here, but it was dismissed out of hand because he was just a "pot-smoking libertarian" and his opinion here was stifled by the Elba Council of Woke.

The ECoW is especially sensitive to comments that come from those who counter their views with direct questions. Direct questions are now labeled "Strawman arguments".

[Hamilton Samuels]

Leave it to Bill Maher to shine a light into the dark corner of leftist bull shit.



HBO's Real Time host, Bill Maher, monologued on progressives' view that progress has not been made in the United States on cultural issues, such as race relations and gay marriage. Maher called those on the left who believed that the United States lacked any progress had "progressophobia," meaning "a brain disorder that strikes liberals and makes them incapable of recognizing progress."

Maher continued, mentioning the views on gay marriage and racism have changed over the years in the United States. "This is one of the big problems with wokeness," Maher said, "that what you say doesn't have to make sense or jive with the facts or even be challenged lest the challenge be conflated with racism.'

"But saying that White power and privilege is at an all-time high is just ridiculous. Higher than a century ago, the year of the Tulsa Race Massacre? Higher than the years when the KKK rode unchecked and Jim Crow went unchallenged? Higher than the 1960s when The Supremes and Willie Mays still couldn't stay at the same hotel as the White people they were working with? Higher than during slavery?"


Maher concluded his monologue by saying "t's not a sin, and it's certainly not inaccurate, to say we've come a long way, baby. Not mission accomplished, just a long way."

Good for him.

He’s walked an unbroken path as have most white folks in the country.

Bill is a libertarian and libertarian are nothing but Republicans who want to smoke weed.

Libertarians are all about wanting small limited government until they’re up to their asses in floodwaters. Then government can’t get big enough, fast enough.

So? You didn't counter his argument. You just attacked him as being someone who shouldn't be able to make that argument.

Counter the argument. I'll use all caps so you can concentrate on the question at hand, which is NOT ABOUT BILL MAHER.

IS WHITE POWER AND PRIVILEGE AT AN ALL-TIME HIGH?

My original comment. No one on the ECoW has yet to answer it.

Meanwhile, there was far less egregious reaction here when I posted about the tremendous increase in Anti-Semitism in the last few years. In fact, that point was slapped around as irrelevant, and as almost a so-what-blacks-are-being-killed-by-the-state argument from some of the ECows.

[Hamilton Samuels]

That you still don't understand what a strawman is doesn't surprise me.    But thank God you no longer feel compelled to call Bankshot a child molester.

Arrogant sort, aren't you?

That you still cling to that which has already been shown to be NOT what the discussion was about shows a tendency to be as narcissistic and dismissive as you claim others to be.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Only white folks can save America from other white folks. Got that?

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2021/06/13/america-has-struggled-racial-issues-and-its-time-save-democracy/7618701002/

 

[Yankguy1]

That you still don't understand what a strawman is doesn't surprise me.    But thank God you no longer feel compelled to call Bankshot a child molester.

Arrogant sort, aren't you?

That you still cling to that which has already been shown to be NOT what the discussion was about shows a tendency to be as narcissistic and dismissive as you claim others to be.

It's really cute that you look up big words in the dictionary and immediately put them to use here.

You've been such an asshole here throughout the years that nobody wants to engage with you even if you hit on an idea worthy of discussion.  That bankshot actually still (occasionally)  does puts him with the angels.  I suggest you find another place to post where maybe your reputation as a loudmouth, bigot, troll and liar hasn't been embedded yet.

[josh]

https://www.cnn.com/videos/us/2021/06/08/texas-mom-poses-as-student-moos-pkg-vpx.cnn

A mom spent almost an entire school day posing as her own 13 year old daughter at school, only getting caught in the last period by a teacher, who asked her to stay after class.

Why? She wanted to test the school's security.

Later that day, she got arrested and charged with all kinds of shit, but as far as I can tell, it's retribution for their having been caught unawares.

[Hamilton Samuels]

Left-wing academic Carol Anderson’s new book, The Second: Race and Guns in a Fatally Unequal America, is all over the news. “The Second Amendment is not about guns — it’s about anti-Blackness, a new book argues,” reads a CNN headline. NPR claims that the author has uncovered the racist “roots” of the Second Amendment.


This is wishful thinking. The Second is an attempt — much like the 1619 Project — to reimagine history in purely racial terms. The result is tendentious polemic that suffers not only from a paucity of historical evidence, but from a dishonest rendering of the facts we do know.

After comprehensively detailing the constitutional debate over slavery and the nefariousness of that institution, Anderson takes the liberty of asserting that the Second Amendment was “not some hallowed ground but rather a bribe, paid again with Black bodies.” This is a contention that isn’t backed by a single contemporaneous quote or piece of hard evidence in the book.

 
Indeed, Anderson ignores the tradition of militias in English common law — codifying the “ancient and indubitable” right in the 1689 English Bill of Rights — which had nothing to do with chattel slavery. Anderson ignores the fact that nearly every intellectual, political, and military leader of the Founding generation — many of whom had no connection to slavery — stressed the importance of self-defense in entirely different contexts.

It was slavery skeptic John Adams, in his 1770 defense of Captain Thomas Preston, one of the soldiers responsible for the Boston Massacre, who argued that even British soldiers had an inherent right to defend themselves from mobs. “Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves,” he noted. When Pennsylvania became the first colony to explicitly guarantee the right to bear arms, it was Benjamin Franklin, by then an abolitionist, who presided over the conference. It was the anti-slavery Samuel Adams who proposed that the Constitution never be used to “authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.” In the writings and speeches of nearly all American Founders, the threat of disarmament was a casus belli.


More fun reading here: https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/06/the-1619-project-comes-for-the-second-amendment/

(We will now pause as the ECoW decides how best to attack the National Review and the writer of this piece.)

[Hamilton Samuels]

That you still don't understand what a strawman is doesn't surprise me.    But thank God you no longer feel compelled to call Bankshot a child molester.

Arrogant sort, aren't you?

That you still cling to that which has already been shown to be NOT what the discussion was about shows a tendency to be as narcissistic and dismissive as you claim others to be.

It's really cute that you look up big words in the dictionary and immediately put them to use here.

You've been such an asshole here throughout the years that nobody wants to engage with you even if you hit on an idea worthy of discussion.  That bankshot actually still (occasionally)  does puts him with the angels.  I suggest you find another place to post where maybe your reputation as a loudmouth, bigot, troll and liar hasn't been embedded yet.

Wonderfully written, and I'm sure the fellow CoWs were impressed.

You might well have learned, though, through those years that I don't really give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks about me personally, as you don't really fucking know me.

But as supercilious as you are, you're still too sensitive to engage in real discussion.

[kidcarter8]

As best as I can tell you and I are the only one to have seen Maher's comments in their entirety, or I know I did. Yet once the tone was set down by Elba's council of woke, that Maher is just a spoiled pot-smoking libertarian, taking a white boy's path of priviledge, yada, yada, yada, the politically correct view had been established, all without watching the actual editorial....

FtR,  I wasn't attacking Maher so much as Smuel's spin of it to concoct a strawman here and then ignore us when it's pointed out. 

 I've never fit any imagined "woke" template.  For example, I believe nations should have a single language and anyone who goes to live in that nation should speak that language,  period.   Unfortunately, when some RW partisan hears that,  they mistakenly think I'm with them on other issues,  when I mos def am not.   I just happen to diverge from many liberals on that issue,  and I'm consistent in my application -- any country you settle in,  learn the damn lingo.   (don't start an argument, it's just an example of how few people here really "march" in lockstep with a brigade)

I don’t watch his show anymore.

My biggest problem with Bill Maher is he is a raging Islamaphobe so I stopped watching him years ago. He’s gotten worse as years go by.

I don't know one wise person with time (and HBO) that doesn't (wouldn't) watch Maher.

[Yankguy1]

That you still don't understand what a strawman is doesn't surprise me.    But thank God you no longer feel compelled to call Bankshot a child molester.

Arrogant sort, aren't you?

That you still cling to that which has already been shown to be NOT what the discussion was about shows a tendency to be as narcissistic and dismissive as you claim others to be.

It's really cute that you look up big words in the dictionary and immediately put them to use here.

You've been such an asshole here throughout the years that nobody wants to engage with you even if you hit on an idea worthy of discussion.  That bankshot actually still (occasionally)  does puts him with the angels.  I suggest you find another place to post where maybe your reputation as a loudmouth, bigot, troll and liar hasn't been embedded yet.

Wonderfully written, and I'm sure the fellow CoWs were impressed.

You might well have learned, though, through those years that I don't really give a fuck what you or anyone else thinks about me personally, as you don't really fucking know me.

But as supercilious as you are, you're still too sensitive to engage in real discussion.

I'm guessing your dictionary page containing "supercilious"  is dog-eared.  "Look how smart I am!! Big words!!"