Oh wow yeah I remember that. The good old days.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Fly,

You don't have to attack everyone. I never called Murray a bold iconoclast. I never suggested that his views were entitled to serious debate. (In an earlier post, I more or less lumped him in with 9-11 truthers and Holocaust deniers.) I certainly never wrote anything that remotely qualifies as fan faction.

I do suspect that he is extremely egotistical and lacking in empathy. Those are not virtues.

And as I have said a million times on this site, when it comes to handing out grades for retrograde positions on race, at the end of the day, people should be judged on what they say and do, not on my guess (or anyone else's guess) about why they say it. In other words, I don't have any use for Murray, regardless of his motivation.

The unstated assumption of "muh norms and civility" is that there is some sort of baseline or imagined normalcy we can return to. I am extremely skeptical of that, and think we should be playing the game according to present reality, not some idealized past that never actually existed.

"Just get more people to vote," is a really bad strategy when the other side is actively disenfranchising your voters and your potential/likely voters.

Just find more? And what happens when they disenfranchise THEM? Just go find more?

Good. If there is one thing young people respond to it’s badgering from old crazy dudes.

Yeah? You gonna cut this **** out on your own? Let's see.


You implied that he was a narcissist who got off on being contrarian instead of white supremacist.

OK and still not seeing the actual motivation, which is 100% white supremacy.

The mother****er BURNED A CROSS what the **** is wrong with you.

This **** is why black turnout is low, btw. This namby pamby unwillingness to define the ****ing stakes of elections because of this "oh people should be judged on what they say and do and also for white people a special white person benefit of the doubt should be added to what they say and do" nonsense that makes both parties seem the ****ing same.

You would be the only one who thinks this, given that the rest of us getting outraged at the norm destruction assume the norms once existed.

I agree that the game has never been fair. Disenfranchisement has been a thing for the entire history of the United States.

But that aspect of American politics has always been disgusting. I just can't imagine feeling good about voting for a candidate that was actively promoting disenfranchisement, even as a tit for tat.

Maybe I'm not enough of a fighter, but I worry that I would just disengage from the debate if that's the sort of person I had to vote for.

This all reminds me of the last paragraph of Animal Farm.

Fly, I've been around here as long as you. Sometimes we agree. Sometimes we don't. But I'm quite certain I can decide on my own whether to "cut this **** out".

And I am not giving Murray the benefit of the doubt about anything. If you promote white supremacy (which I believe Murray does), then you suck as a human being. Not everyone who promotes white supremacy does so for the same reasons. But there is no good reason. I probably have the least sympathy of all for the well educated "scientific" racists like Murray because they don't have the excuse of ignorance.

I do have an honest question. I'm no Charles Murray scholar. What is the cross-burning reference? I'm not doubting you. I just don't know what you are referring to.

Has fly ever made a single post not directly attacking someone?

He is not the only one. I am more concerned that threat level is still being underestimated and the tit for tat **** being discussed is already too little too late.

If we are headed toward the worst case here, even as our previous keep-your-powder-dry hopes have been relentlessly shattered over and over and over, it will be an interesting academic question about how did they let it happen just like it always is in hindsight.

Oh, they steal a SCOTUS seat? Legalize discrimination against homosexuals? Allow the baby prison camps and Muslim bans? Maybe they will cut it out soon though, huh?

So....what if Mueller comes out with his findings right before the midterms that golly, there was no collusion after all! Cuz, like Trump hates him right? Lotta tweets about that so it must be true. I mean it is more absurd that the left is trusting the FBI than it is that the right has disavowed them! And when the right gets the answer they want, they will pick right up where they left off on the law and order, respect the institution grift, just like they did with the supreme court ruling they liked when previously it was activist judges. A well-timed announcement of no collusion before the midterms? That could certainly hurt the ol' blue wave.

But..that would never happen. None of the things that have happened could possibly happen, from Trump running right on up to infant detention being defended by our co-workers and neighbors on social media. Not possible here.

I'm far more concerned with like-minded people not seeing how dire this situation is than I am in turning around the self-identified part of the population who doesn't care enough to be upset already. The "middle" are the people who would still be "unsure" when people are fleeing death camps, but kind of happy that they got a better job out of it.

When he was a kid he got in trouble with some friends for burning a cross. He claims they didn’t know it was racist which is obviously idiotic. Murray is a racist.

fly is kind of being a dick here but man you people are not helping by picking this hill to die on. Murray and Harris are racist morons, move on.

Yeah, this isn't gonna happen, although it is disquieting that the left now sees the FBI as a savior.

The more worrisome outcome is Muller finding clear proof of egregious criminal behavior and the Republican Senate refusing to impeach.

Pardon me if this was already brought up kind of zoning out on SH talk.

Thanks. I guess that would have been in the 1950s or 1960s? Yeah, there is no way that any person in that era could possibly have not associated burning crosses with lynchings and the Klan.

I have no interest in dying on the Murray hill. As I said, I'm no fan and no apologist. Happy to move on.

Is this likely to get auto-reversed somewhere along the appeal chain because of the SCOTUS decision?

https://twitter.com/ironstowe/status...524564992?s=19

Edit: seeing some sources saying quote is fake.

Yeah and I'm telling you that you should decide to do so.

Why is it so hard for you to forthrightly claim he's racist? That he "promotes" white supremacy for some unspecified reasons is STILL WHITEWASHING HIS CHARACTER. He's a vile racist!

He, along with a small group of fellow troublemakers and rapscallions, affixed two pieces of wood in roughly a T shape, stood it upright, and set it on fire.

It's not a metaphor, they burned a ****ing cross.

simplictus- Sammy Harris' aggressive skepticism training not paying off with that obviously fake quote, I see.

There's some cruel irony that the right in the United States absolutely behaves like a Marxist analysis of politics as a struggle between interest groups is correct, while much of the left recoils in gasping effrontery at the idea that they even have an opposition.

"Ah, let's see what mischief this Charles Murray fellow has gotten into these days" man he's a ****ing racist, he's a bad person, people who endorse his ideas will implement policies that are bad for black people intentionally.


One of the most insane things about the norms thing is how easy it is for the right to just TELL the liberals that a norm exists and then the libs immediately agree and bemoan the antifa regressive left doing partisanship. A great example is how the right has tried to "gotcha" the libs about Red Hen by analogizing it to what if pro-life people started doing protests of abortion clinics, huh, how would you like it then? As if Bill O'Reilly didn't literally incite an actual ****ing murder.

Fly, let's just stop this. If we disagree at all about Murray, it's only on the very margins. I called Murray a racist, used that exact word, in the very quote that you were responding to.

I have seen more comparisons of Red Hen to the cake shop.

I would put the issue a bit differently. It's the false equivalency that is galling. Not all political views are entitled to equal respect. At some point, you have to draw moral judgments about people's political views. The cake shop owner and the Red Hen owner are doing something a little more significant than expressing contrary views about which flavor of ice cream is best.

Lol mods.