Gyroscopic Investing

I honestly don't remember either. He may well have just been asked about Charlottesville. I think a lot of conservative people would say that Charlottesville at its heart was about whether Confederate statues should be allowed to remain. A lot of liberal people would say it was about white supremacy. I know that the media portrays it as being about white supremacy. There's a big difference between arguing that a culture should be allowed to survive and arguing that a culture is supreme.

I certainly don't believe that whites are supreme, but I do believe that American culture deserves to survive as much as any other culture. And I want all cultures to survive. I don't want to live in a world where everybody is part of one huge mono-culture.

I think I would be an example of what Trump was talking about. I am white. I have black friends, brown friends (actually married to a dark brown legal immigrant), yellow friends, etc. I don't hate anybody, not legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, homosexuals, etc. I would say that relative to the general population, I am a "good person" in the context of what Trump was saying about there being good people on both sides of the debate. All I'm saying is that what Trump said was very accurate, and yet the media portrayed it as another example of Hitler coming back to life.

He said the "fine people" part first, and then moved on to Robert E Lee.
Can't imagine why people think he sympathizes with some of the supremacists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

I'm not saying you're wrong. Just that there were no "fine people" on that other side.

And then we get told that when Trump calls them fake news that he is threatening the First Amendment. All he's doing is saying the truth. Guess what, the President has a First Amendment right too.

If you would have told me 5 years ago that I would be supporting Donald Trump as President, I would have laughed myself silly. But truly I am very glad that he is President. It has opened my eyes to the truth that 99% of the political stuff that we hear in the media is propaganda.

For many years, I was an avid NPR listener and was convinced that they are fairly even-handed politically. Let's just say that I am no longer convinced. Now if I turn them on for a few minutes, their grave, measured, holier-than-thou virtue-signaling makes me want to puke.

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:01 pm He said the "fine people" part first, and then moved on to Robert E Lee.
Can't imagine why people think he sympathizes with some of the supremacists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

I'm not saying you're wrong. Just that there were no "fine people" on that other side.

Until very, VERY recently, it was virtually universally accepted in both the North and the South that Lee in particular was a virtuous man worthy of many accolades. Are you saying there have been virtually no "fine people" in the US until about 20 years ago?

stuper1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:05 pm For many years, I was an avid NPR listener and was convinced that they are fairly even-handed politically. Let's just say that I am no longer convinced. Now if I turn them on for a few minutes, their grave, measured, holier-than-thou virtue-signaling makes me want to puke.

On that, we definitely agree. There used to be stories from which you could still learn something. There are still a few science shows, and Living on Earth, but in general it's just identity identity identity every damn day. I know that because I still turn it on, but I usually end up switching it off promptly.

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:15 pm

stuper1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:05 pm For many years, I was an avid NPR listener and was convinced that they are fairly even-handed politically. Let's just say that I am no longer convinced. Now if I turn them on for a few minutes, their grave, measured, holier-than-thou virtue-signaling makes me want to puke.

On that, we definitely agree. There used to be stories from which you could still learn something. There are still a few science shows, and Living on Earth, but in general it's just identity identity identity every damn day. I know that because I still turn it on, but I usually end up switching it off promptly.

Good to hear.

Another word for "identity identity identity" is "racism". The real racists are the ones on the left who can't talk about anything except "identity". Meanwhile they are accusing conservatives of being racists when conservatives just want to get on with life in a color-blind way.

Xan wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:13 pm

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:01 pm He said the "fine people" part first, and then moved on to Robert E Lee.
Can't imagine why people think he sympathizes with some of the supremacists.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

I'm not saying you're wrong. Just that there were no "fine people" on that other side.

Until very, VERY recently, it was virtually universally accepted in both the North and the South that Lee in particular was a virtuous man worthy of many accolades. Are you saying there have been virtually no "fine people" in the US until about 20 years ago?

No Xan, and I'm sorry if it came off that way. There are things about Robert E Lee that I also respect. In my opinion, both sides showed up at Charlottesville to make trouble. I know that a great many people disagree with that opinion.
Trump's words were spoken off the cuff and not prepared, so maybe I should cut him a little more slack, but I cannot, because of context.
Yes, he said that white supremacists are bad. He did throw us that bone. However, his overall speech was (and remains) as slippery as Ilhan Omar's. Does anyone really think that Omar is *only* concerned about the Israel lobby's influence on America? Does anyone really think that Trump doesn't support the extreme right?

Do you remember when Libertarian666 insisted that Trump never said the press is the enemy of the people, but only that fake news is the enemy of the people? Whether that was technically true or not, it became technically false later on, when Trump tweeted "The New York Times" <are> the enemy of the people." I reprinted that tweet, and techno, your response was that, well, the NYT is fake news. So, they're not the press?

I remember Al Franken defending the Democrats and the Left on Air America Radio (now defunct, I think). He would defend them to a fault, to the point where a left/Democrat caller told him that he was actually doing his side a disservice, because he would just try to make technical points and was, in the process, obfuscating the truth.

Well, I think that's what fervent Trump supporters are doing. There are some things, some actions, that I like about Trump. But to try to glean from the repeated quoting of that speech's phrase, "fine people on both sides", the notion that Trump was somehow being misrepresented, is crazy. We have the context of all his other words and tweets.

If you're a white supremacist and you view Trump's response to Charlottesville, are you going to think, "Oh darn, he was just giving props to Robert E Lee?" or are you going to be emboldened.

I believe the latter, and that's why I think the quote gets repeated. If CNN used the quote to say the Donald Trump is a white supremacist and some kind of nazi supporter, then they are wrong or lying. I think they repeat the quote as evidence that Trump is being irresponsible adn emboldening the haters.

Sounds to me like we disagree on this matter. When I hear Trump say that there are fine people on both sides, I hear him saying the truth. No more, no less.

Do you see conservatives accosting liberal politicians and their families in restaurants and shouting them out of a quiet family dinner?

When you see stuff like that, does it make you wonder who the real aggressor at Charlottesville was?

stuper1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:44 pm Sounds to me like we disagree on this matter. When I hear Trump say that there are fine people on both sides, I hear him saying the truth. No more, no less.

Do you see conservatives accosting liberal politicians and their families in restaurants and shouting them out of a quiet family dinner?

I do hate that. Sarah Sanders being turned away from any establishment (although: bakery defense?), Spicey being screamed at in an Apple store by Shree (I forget her last name). Maxine Waters calling for this kind of behavior. It's all barbaric.

When you see stuff like that, does it make you wonder who the real aggressor at Charlottesville was?

Oh, I think antifa was every bit as nauseating as the white power people. In fact, I remember hating antifa more. Although I didn't have captions on, and I thought the white power people were merely saying "You will not replace us." I'm smiling, but that's a true statement.

--
Ok, I wouldn't even mind leaving the Lee statue up myself if I thought there were a net benefit. Suppose I'm the final authority on the matter - scary thought, I know. I would never pull Dukes of Hazzard from cable, depriving Bo Duke (John Schneider, New York stater) of residuals. I would not even blur out the Confederate Flag from his car (called The General Lee if I recall). Why not? Because you can watch the show and see that the Duke brothers are not stringing up African Americans. Never meanin' no harm- it's in the theme song! We can't erase all movies and shows from a different time.

These statues probably cause a lot of pain, and not just for the "triggered" "snowflakes." While Robert E Lee should absolutely remain in history books and museums (as should Joseph Stalin), it's probably for the best that we don't have a big monument to him in this day and age. He was only fighting for his side, etc etc, but his statue represents slavery, like it or not. There is no 'never meanin' no harm' context, unless it's in a history book or written on the plaque of a museum exhibit.

Would these statues survive antifa terrorists anyway?

--
Now, let's say you're the President of the United States, and you feel for the 3 people that only came to save the statue, not the horde with tiki torches saying "Jews will not replace us." But, you saw what happened. You know a woman was even murdered by car. You are the President. You have a message for the people, and you know they're going to listen to you whether they love you or hate you. You're going to call out antifa thugs and white supremacists; that's clear.

Is your overriding message to the masses going to be, "There were fine people on both sides" with an added footnote?

A pretty good way to turn everyday people who want to keep the statues into pitchfork-bearing white supremacists is probably to completely eliminate their standing in the public square.

These folks see the President completely excoriated for years on end for daring to say the slightest nice thing about them. The SLIGHTEST. This shows them that "society" has completely abandoned them. They have no hope of their viewpoint ever getting an honest hearing. May as well grab the pitchfork!

Far from emboldening anybody, I see Trump's remarks as an attempt at real unification and dialogue in this country. It was a message of moderation. And he is constantly destroyed for it in the media.

Xan, we'll disagree on the emboldening, however I agree with your take on the sentiment of "everyday people" if you are referring to the white working class, blue collar up through and including the middle class."

I absolutely see how they feel let down -- in general. I'm not taking about the statue here -- and I think this is a big part of why Trump won the election. I have read their interviews.

I guess I just don't think that was the time or place to stick up for that group, as it was a subtlety lost on the (possibly stupid) masses.

I also think if Trump said something nice about the white working class and at the same time was not calling his opponents "low-IQ individuals", "grab'em by the pussy", imitating disabled people, "lock'er up", and so on, he probably wouldn't be vilified for that nice thing he said about white people.

I think you are right. And I hope you are right. It certainly will be interesting.

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:15 am Alt-Left screams in pregnant Chelsea Clinton’s face and blames her for the Christchurch mosque massacre.

I've been out of the loop for a few days. That Muslim Ctrl-Left female was yelling at Chelsea Clinton because Chelsea Clinton caused a shooting by twittering that people shouldn't be anti-Semitic? Then uploaded a video of her yelling at her on twitter? Then everyone twitted about it?

Kriegsspiel wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 6:11 pm

dualstow wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 7:15 am Alt-Left screams in pregnant Chelsea Clinton’s face and blames her for the Christchurch mosque massacre.

I've been out of the loop for a few days. That Muslim Ctrl-Left female was yelling at Chelsea Clinton because Chelsea Clinton caused a shooting by twittering that people shouldn't be anti-Semitic? Then uploaded a video of her yelling at her on twitter? Then everyone twitted about it?

Yep. Well, with regard to the first question, apparently because some whack job murdered Muslims in Christchurch, NZ, Rep Omar is now beyond reproach. We are not allowed to criticize her because that will cause...mass killings.

In completely unrelated news, a Norwegian rapper of Arab (or Persian?) extraction who was charged for saying "F*k the Jews! They are all corrupt!" has been released because the Norwegian authorities said, hey, maybe he was just "criticizing Israel" when he said that.

https://www.reddit.com/r/neoliberal/com ... ews_at_an/

This isn't the Left eating itself, per se, but I don't want to give "eating Omar" its own thread. That's not warranted.

ILHAN OMAR ACCUSED OF SUPPORTING AIPAC AFTER CRITIQUING ASSAD

US Representative Ilhan Omar tweeted support for the Syrian people who revolted against the regime of President Bashar Assad on Friday. In response she was accused of supporting the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) and the CIA, and was slammed for her views by pro-Assad activists and online trolls.

https://www.jpost.com/American-Politics ... sad-583633

Fun.

Today I learned that Linda Sarsour's surname means "cockroach!" I learned this from Linda Sarsour herself.
https://twitter.com/yoism/status/1108391334136549378

PP67 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 11, 2019 1:11 pm This may be a combination of you-find-what-you’re-looking-for and/or fake news but I found this video more than a bit disturbing.

I’d love better minds than mine give me their opinion.

Thanks!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1h5iv6sECGU&app=desktop

Part II

Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 3:29 pm

stuper1 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 18, 2019 1:05 pm And then we get told that when Trump calls them fake news that he is threatening the First Amendment. All he's doing is saying the truth. Guess what, the President has a First Amendment right too.

If you would have told me 5 years ago that I would be supporting Donald Trump as President, I would have laughed myself silly. But truly I am very glad that he is President. It has opened my eyes to the truth that 99% of the political stuff that we hear in the media is propaganda.

For many years, I was an avid NPR listener and was convinced that they are fairly even-handed politically. Let's just say that I am no longer convinced. Now if I turn them on for a few minutes, their grave, measured, holier-than-thou virtue-signaling makes me want to puke.

This is why Trump is going to be re-elected, barring a black swan event.

The lunatic left has overplayed their hand so much that they have turned almost everyone significantly to the right of Che Guevara into a Trump supporter.

And they are still at it!

At this rate, he will win in a landslide.

Now the NBC/DNC and Yashar Ali thing.

I have done a great deal of research on hate crimes in America, and the tragically underreported fact is that an enormous number of such incidents reported over the past decades turn out to have been hoaxes.

- Wilfred Reilly

https://www.commentarymagazine.com/arti ... ey-happen/

(I didn’t read the whole thing. Too long).

Tim Pool has been a tear lately.

This video talks about Matt Yglesias (Vox) congratulating the progressive media on misleading people (mostly Democrats, obviously) about their taxes.

https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-con ... l/788/text

Section 6 would presumably modify the law to make it illegal to bar anyone identifying as a female to play female sports in a public school. They literally had a radical feminist there to claim that if they pass this bill, "women's rights will be abolished, and every right that women fought for will cease to exist." LOL

Which college is going to be first?

I've wondered what effect the transgender craze will have on Olympic women's competition. If a (former) man could get classified as a women, he'd have a huge advantage in most sports, everything from skiing to running to figure skating. I'd be surprised if no one's figured that out yet. I can't wait to see what happens the first time a transgender wins a gold medal in a women's competition.

sophie wrote: ↑Fri Apr 12, 2019 7:17 am I've wondered what effect the transgender craze will have on Olympic women's competition. If a (former) man could get classified as a women, he'd have a huge advantage in most sports, everything from skiing to running to figure skating. I'd be surprised if no one's figured that out yet. I can't wait to see what happens the first time a transgender wins a gold medal in a women's competition.

Hopefully, the one good thing this tranny movement brings about is bringing down the massive sports-industrial complex. It'll be worth it if it does.

Then individuals can be free to choose what type of environment they want to compete, in a much more decentralized and non-state-dependent models that hopefully are no longer utter leeches on our collective attention.