My Son Writes About Twitter, Trump And The Riots
- Thread starter Ponca Dan
- Start date
Long read feel free to look at summaries. It’s not the George Floyd incident that is tearing America apart. It is the false narrative put out by the main stream media to incite chaos....and before you say thAts old. Future stats are very similar. This is just a concise presentation.
Cowboyvol, here’s the deal Trump gets 90%+ bad ink and media coverage. He almost always fights his own battles instead of sending his slimy sycophantic acolytes out to do his dirty work and he definitely doesn’t run around apologizing for the US and our past. Is he perfect not by a long shot, but he has the mantle to take a tremendous amount of heat and still be standing. Throw in the soft coup, the endless accusations, investigations and outright slander and he is still there. No one before him could take all that crap and still make any effective decisions.
I’ll readily admit he makes some unforced errors but there is no doubt in my mind that that he puts America, Americans and the future of America first some I’m willing to overlook a lot of the warts. What president has done that in the last 30 years? Certainly wasn’t the previous dipshit, nor Bush, nor Clinton or Bush Sr. What is, or at least should be, obvious is that the system is so stacked against agents of change its dam near impossible to get anything done.
Fact is you can’t effectively govern anyone you feel sorry for or worse think certain groups are owed something for past sins. Extolling the premise that anyone is “owed anything” is poisonous and a false hope. I also taught way back when and never allowed my personal opinions to jump into discussions. I wanted my students to critically thing, gather facts and deduce solutions or opinions for themselves.
Oh almost forgot, PD not a fan of the article, he would be better served as a writer, especially one who wants to jump into political opinion, to present more reliable sources or at least summarize more sources than one. When the economy gets back on track after Trump gets another 4, he’ll go down as one of the best, warts and all. It is funny that a president who got virtually no credit for low levels of minority unemployment is always hung with the racist tag. Can promise as well that when the economy starts to recover and black unemployment is at 15, 20 or 25% the media will do everything in their power to beat Trump with that stat.
Would love to get your thoughts after reviewing the information. You are clearly a smart guy. Don’t feel bad I had always thought the whole cops hate Black’s narrative was overblown quite a bit, but is just an incredibly sad misconception that will continue to destroy our country. How about post read we both agree to blame the extremely extremely few cops that commit these atrocious crimes against anyone and quit trying to project it to law enforcement as a whole. Deal?
Well, I tried to write a reply and somehow my phone ate it. I’ll try again and hope this isn’t just a repeat.
I appreciate your honest appraisal of the article. I did not expect very many people on this board to like it, but I did think it would make for an interesting thread. I knew that some people, the real hard-core Trump loyalists would not be able to get through the whole thing, but I also knew some of you would read it, try and digest what was said and make cogent rebuttals.
If you go to The Ringer you will see that most of the articles are on that subject, so I assume the editors told the writers to write their opinions. I know this was a hot-button issue for Brian anyway, but I doubt he’d have submitted the piece unless he was told to. But don’t misunderstand: he wrote what he thought, and didn’t care what the reaction would be from the public. (He’s like his old man that way.)
Ponca - expanding on my other thought. Toward the end of the article the word ‘truth’ and ‘reality’ is used a couple of times. The problem is his article has more incorrect statements and mischaracterizations than what he is claiming Trump does. Odd to me that if he is wanting to show Trump lies that he would make and amplify false claims in the article.
Also, I am not an English Major, but the italics sentence ... I am not sure what he is attempting to convey.
———————————————-
“The idea, and the ideal, of truth have always been vital to the vision of reform articulated by American civil rights movements. The identification and recognition of what is actually happening is the necessary first step in achieving change. In a country where it is simply far more convenient for white Americans not to identify and not to recognize the reality it has imposed on the rest—where to identify and recognize that reality would throw cherished cultural narratives into question and challenge the legitimacy of existing structures of power—any attempt to bring about change is attended by a hideous difficulty. The difficulty is hideous in part because of its magnitude and in part because of what it reveals about human nature: that your fellow citizens would, for the most part, rather lie to themselves, would rather drug themselves with easy fictions, than acknowledge the reality that confronts you every day.
When Martin Luther King Jr. said that “a riot is the language of the unheard”—to take a quote that was widely shared this weekend—he was talking about the truth: who is oblivious to it and how they can be made aware. When James Baldwin said that “whatever white people do not know about Negroes reveals, precisely and inexorably, what they do not know about themselves,” he was talking about the truth:”
Also, I am not an English Major, but the italics sentence ... I am not sure what he is attempting to convey.
———————————————-
“The idea, and the ideal, of truth have always been vital to the vision of reform articulated by American civil rights movements. The identification and recognition of what is actually happening is the necessary first step in achieving change. In a country where it is simply far more convenient for white Americans not to identify and not to recognize the reality it has imposed on the rest—where to identify and recognize that reality would throw cherished cultural narratives into question and challenge the legitimacy of existing structures of power—any attempt to bring about change is attended by a hideous difficulty. The difficulty is hideous in part because of its magnitude and in part because of what it reveals about human nature: that your fellow citizens would, for the most part, rather lie to themselves, would rather drug themselves with easy fictions, than acknowledge the reality that confronts you every day.
When Martin Luther King Jr. said that “a riot is the language of the unheard”—to take a quote that was widely shared this weekend—he was talking about the truth: who is oblivious to it and how they can be made aware. When James Baldwin said that “whatever white people do not know about Negroes reveals, precisely and inexorably, what they do not know about themselves,” he was talking about the truth:”
Last edited:
Ponca I was raised in a household that never really talked about politics so I never have really had a bias one way or the other. Once I was in my late 20's I started paying more attention. I have hunted since I was young and am a strong believer in the 2nd amendment. I also believe that climate change is an issue that we as a country need to take more serious. When Trump was elected, I thought it may be a good thing for the country to have a different type of president. One with a ton of business experience may bring a new element to the country leadership. I also liked the fact that Trump wouldn't let people make up his mind for him. Others wouldn't have so much influence over his decision making. The other side of that is what if he is terrible at making decisions? Or doesn't make them at all?
In this thread a poster says "Your son should learn to better understand those with differing views". If that's the case then why should our president not be held to the same standard? He has not shown one bit of understanding for those who disagree with him. He just gets mad, calls them names, and throws fits. All you have to do is look at his twitter page. That’s the crazy part to me! How can you look through his twitter page and go on to believe he is not dividing the country? That’s literally what he is doing when he calls out Governors or Mayors simply because they are Democrat. Or labels all media as liars. Continually calls the Coronavirus the Chinese virus. You don’t think a few Asian Americans have been discriminated against due to this? Making definitive statements that the left is to blame. That’s just as irresponsible as the other side claiming its all “white supremist”.
In my opinion Trump has not been a great representation for America. Every good quality in leadership somehow seems to escape him. He does nothing but blame others for failures and demand credit for any success. He doesn’t seem to have any empathy or compassion. His communication skills are lacking to say the least. The things I had hoped would be a positive for him as a president have unfortunately not translated well. None of that is about choosing sides between Republicans or Democrats. Its simply just about Trump and his actions. One thing I will agree with some posters on is that the deck was stacked against Trump when he was elected. He really didn’t get the benefit of the doubt that most all other presidents have in the past. Solid piece by your son Ponca and good for you posting it knowing what would happen.
In this thread a poster says "Your son should learn to better understand those with differing views". If that's the case then why should our president not be held to the same standard? He has not shown one bit of understanding for those who disagree with him. He just gets mad, calls them names, and throws fits. All you have to do is look at his twitter page. That’s the crazy part to me! How can you look through his twitter page and go on to believe he is not dividing the country? That’s literally what he is doing when he calls out Governors or Mayors simply because they are Democrat. Or labels all media as liars. Continually calls the Coronavirus the Chinese virus. You don’t think a few Asian Americans have been discriminated against due to this? Making definitive statements that the left is to blame. That’s just as irresponsible as the other side claiming its all “white supremist”.
In my opinion Trump has not been a great representation for America. Every good quality in leadership somehow seems to escape him. He does nothing but blame others for failures and demand credit for any success. He doesn’t seem to have any empathy or compassion. His communication skills are lacking to say the least. The things I had hoped would be a positive for him as a president have unfortunately not translated well. None of that is about choosing sides between Republicans or Democrats. Its simply just about Trump and his actions. One thing I will agree with some posters on is that the deck was stacked against Trump when he was elected. He really didn’t get the benefit of the doubt that most all other presidents have in the past. Solid piece by your son Ponca and good for you posting it knowing what would happen.
Not my favorite of his articles TBH. Not bc of the subject or his opinion (I don’t know how you could disagree that Trumps use of Twitter is horribly dangerous at this point), more from a technical standpoint. Kind of got a little lost in the middle. What do I know though, I was always horrible in and advanced English classes haha. Either way, I’d be proud as could be if that was my kid putting our articles like he does.
PD I shared this article with my wife who grew up in new york and both of us were very impressed by this article.Your son has the ability to seek out truth without being harsh. Kudos to him we are proud of him.
I didn’t bother to read the whole thread before responding, so I’ll probably only be repeating what some else said and I only got eight lines into the story before I saw something that he wrongly assumes. It doesn’t look like your son knows his history. When your son wrote that Trump “appears to threaten to order the military to open fire” on the protesters, he, just like the MSM, is misinterpreting Trump's tweet. Trump was referring to the 1992 LA riots when looting and the fact that the LA police fled the area led to many Asian store owners taking matters into their own hands, using weapons, and firing at looters to guard their shops from being broken into.
Have him check out the video “Uprising: Hip-Hop and the LA Riots” to see what Trump was referring to. If you think the video is going to be one sided, you’re probably right because It’s narrated by Snoop Dog and interviews - and defends - primarily people who took part in the riots, including those who beat Reginald Denny for no reason OTHER THAN BEING A WHITE MAN.
Last edited:
Yes, good point. I think what he is saying is that we experience truth individually, which makes cherished notions one feels hard to eject when the truth of our personal experience butts up against someone else’s experience (truth) that contradicts our own. In racial matters there are differing realities experienced by blacks and whites. Both experiences are very real, both are true, but it is difficult (for whites especially) to comprehend a truth of which we are not familiar. The truth is blacks on average have very different encounters with the police than do whites. I loved his line that the perspectives that whites have is the police are here to protect us, while the black experience feels more like the police are an occupying force. That’s really hard for whites to come to grips with because it tarnishes cherished beliefs that make up our “truth.” So it is easier for us to ignore it or deny it. And his point is until we quit ignoring it and denying it the true black experience with the police will continue unabated, more George Floyd incidents will flare up causing more outraged and riotous response. We whites don’t want to face that truth. As Al Pacino said in Scent of a Woman we don’t face it because “it’s too damn hard.” The article was certain to upset people, but until we recognize there exists a truth not of our experience but of our making turmoil is bound to continue and only get worse.
Last edited:
If you have to explain what you think he was saying then he didn't say it very well. Hence the shit article reviews.
Your original proposition was (I cut and pasted):
Unarmed blacks killed officers than officers killed unarmed blacks.
Which morphed into something a bit different....
More unarmed blacks killed cops than unarmed cops kill blacks....which is different than what you originally said. I would further say that this one would not skake any conceptions of whether there is a problem with black citizen/officer encounters because the overwhelming majority of black citizen/officer encounters involved armed cops so eliminating such uses of force by police is completely irrelevant.
Even then, when looking at the well massaged numbers of the Dolan Consulting group.....I notice that it says essentially nothing about the armed or unarmed status of black citizens or the officers when a death has occurred.
So no, the link you provided does not support your particular propositions. Doesn't debunk them either. More accurately, it doesn't comment on the veracity of your proposition at all.
Furthermore, the Dolan Consulting Group is a training and consulting group that exclusively markets to law enforcement/public safety agencies buying their services. You have to factor in the fact that they rely entirely upon the support and purchases of law enforcement agencies for their survival in looking at their analysis. They aren't exactly an unbiased research team.
Finally, this quote clearly establishes that you are making several wrong assumptions about where I am coming from in challenging you. I just like people to support their factual propositions with....facts. If you had stated this as an opinion, I might have agreed or disagreed with your opinion. I would not have challenged you to establish the factual veracity of you opinion, though.
I am not a proponent of the "whole cops hate Black's [sic] narrative". I never have been. Hell, I've worked in and for law enforcement for 20+ years and am married to a cop for gods' sake. This week, I have been accused of being too deep in the opposite "no bad cops" or "no systemic problems" narrative by a poster on this site for exactly those reasons.
There are positions between "cops hate blacks" and "extremely extremely few cops"/ "a few bad apples" dismissal or excuse for not addressing systemic problems. There are positions between the binary extreme. There almost always are. I'm there in the shades of gray.
Thank you for calling me a smart guy...if it was sincere. There are plenty here and in my family that would disagree with that assessment.
Last edited:
Look, there is a reason people want to see Trump banished or removed from Twitter......he used it as a very effective vehicle to get elected in 2016. There will be a huge effort to not allow him to start back with his rallies also. Again, I don't agree with everything he says on Twitter, but no matter what he says or does it will be panned as bad, racist, violent etc etc. So hard to take all the "sky is falling" prognosticators very serious. Plus I seriously doubt the ANTIFA leaders are watching Trumps Twitter feed and saying "oh shit he just said we are the devil" or "we could get shot" lets fill up another 100 Molotov cocktails.
Your original proposition was (I cut and pasted):
Unarmed blacks killed officers than officers killed unarmed blacks.
Which morphed into something a bit different....
More unarmed blacks killed cops than unarmed cops kill blacks....which is different than what you originally said. I would further say that this one would not skake any conceptions of whether there is a problem with black citizen/officer encounters because the overwhelming majority of black citizen/officer encounters involved armed cops so eliminating such uses of force by police is completely irrelevant.
Even then, when looking at the well massaged numbers of the Dolan Consulting group.....I notice that it says essentially nothing about the armed or unarmed status of black citizens or the officers when a death has occurred.
So no, the link you provided does not support your particular propositions. Doesn't debunk them either. More accurately, it doesn't comment on the veracity of your proposition at all.
Furthermore, the Dolan Consulting Group is a training and consulting group that exclusively markets to law enforcement/public safety agencies buying their services. You have to factor in the fact that they rely entirely upon the support and purchases of law enforcement agencies for their survival in looking at their analysis. They aren't exactly an unbiased research team.
Finally, this quote clearly establishes that you are making several wrong assumptions about where I am coming from in challenging you. I just like people to support their factual propositions with....facts. If you had stated this as an opinion, I might have agreed or disagreed with your opinion. I would not have challenged you to establish the factual veracity of you opinion, though.
I am not a proponent of the "whole cops hate Black's [sic] narrative". I never have been. Hell, I've worked in and for law enforcement for 20+ years and am married to a cop for gods' sake. This week, I have been accused of being too deep in the opposite "no bad cops" or "no systemic problems" narrative by a poster on this site for exactly those reasons.
There are positions between "cops hate blacks" and "extremely extremely few cops"/ "a few bad apples" dismissal or excuse for not addressing systemic problems. There are positions between the binary extreme. There almost always are. I'm there in the shades of gray.
Thank you for calling me a smart guy...if it was sincere. There are plenty here and in my family that would disagree with that assessment.
I will admit I misjudged you as being anti LE and did take offense to what appeared to be an accusation of making the information up. The document is well sourced and falls in line with future data. I wouldn’t have used it or given it credence otherwise. There is an extremely overinflated conception often fanned by the media that LE is out to get minorities. It is our responsibility as citizens to add substance to emotional instances before projecting further. Unfortunately there is a lack of due care in this matter by media and politicians. Finally as the consulting firm states........feel free to review their source data if you would like. “Unfortunately, the myths we addressed here will apparently continue to be reported by major media sources as fact, and are now incorporated into official public policies. It is the hope of the Dolan Consulting Group that readers of this report will check its authenticity by examining its source materials. It is also the hope of the Dolan Consulting Group that readers will share their conclusions as widely as possible in order to dispel these myths that are having grave consequences for the safety of law enforcement officers and grave consequences for the safety and stability of our society.”Your original proposition was (I cut and pasted):
Unarmed blacks killed officers than officers killed unarmed blacks.
Which morphed into something a bit different....
More unarmed blacks killed cops than unarmed cops kill blacks....which is different than what you originally said. I would further say that this one would not skake any conceptions of whether there is a problem with black citizen/officer encounters because the overwhelming majority of black citizen/officer encounters involved armed cops so eliminating such uses of force by police is completely irrelevant.
Even then, when looking at the well massaged numbers of the Dolan Consulting group.....I notice that it says essentially nothing about the armed or unarmed status of black citizens or the officers when a death has occurred.
So no, the link you provided does not support your particular propositions. Doesn't debunk them either. More accurately, it doesn't comment on the veracity of your proposition at all.
Furthermore, the Dolan Consulting Group is a training and consulting group that exclusively markets to law enforcement/public safety agencies buying their services. You have to factor in the fact that they rely entirely upon the support and purchases of law enforcement agencies for their survival in looking at their analysis. They aren't exactly an unbiased research team.
Finally, this quote clearly establishes that you are making several wrong assumptions about where I am coming from in challenging you. I just like people to support their factual propositions with....facts. If you had stated this as an opinion, I might have agreed or disagreed with your opinion. I would not have challenged you to establish the factual veracity of you opinion, though.
I am not a proponent of the "whole cops hate Black's [sic] narrative". I never have been. Hell, I've worked in and for law enforcement for 20+ years and am married to a cop for gods' sake. This week, I have been accused of being too deep in the opposite "no bad cops" or "no systemic problems" narrative by a poster on this site for exactly those reasons.
There are positions between "cops hate blacks" and "extremely extremely few cops"/ "a few bad apples" dismissal or excuse for not addressing systemic problems. There are positions between the binary extreme. There almost always are. I'm there in the shades of gray.
Thank you for calling me a smart guy...if it was sincere. There are plenty here and in my family that would disagree with that assessment.
Last edited:
It was no way an accusation of making the information up, but I'm starting to think that is a possibility at this point with your claim that that data supports your PARTICULAR SPECIFIC PROPOSITION (as opposed to your general, broad opinion)….because it doesn't. It doesn't comment or provide data of the specific particular proposition. I'm not at the point of believing you're making it up though, I'm chalking it up more to you aren't really understanding that I am talking about specific propositions you made versus your general opinion of the issue.
Even their data doesn't establish the veracity of your PARTICULAR claim. It doesn't even provide data on officer deaths at the hands of unarmed black citizens OR deaths of black citizens at the hands of unarmed officer deaths. So it doesn't support or refute the particular factual assertion we are talking about. Sure supports your general opinion of the whole issue....but that isn't what I am interested in.
Dolan is very open about their OPINION of how the raw numbers should be looked at. They are very open in their report about how they have massaged them. I've taken classes from Dolan Consulting Group. They don't make any bones about being from having a pro-LE perspective. You trust their reasoning and opinions regarding those numbers unreservedly...fine. I don't particularly.
Interesting article about killings, but says nothing about systemic harassment or abuse. After decades of suffering at the hands of harassment and abuse it is time for rectification.
A different spin would’ve been how the constant lies by Brennan, Clapper, Schiff, Pelosi, Schumer led us here.
Let’s list all the lies from both sides and see which ones divided us.
Did the Post have any reference materials for Schiff?
I’d love to see that one if he has a source.
Let’s list all the lies from both sides and see which ones divided us.
Did the Post have any reference materials for Schiff?
I’d love to see that one if he has a source.
Yes, that would have been a completely different spin about a completely different topic. It would make for an interesting article, but it would have nothing to do with the subject of the article written.
Not really. His article was like all these climate studies that leave the sun out of the equation.
The people I listed are responsible for this hate. They sold it every day. Mostly lies. The racism lies, lies about immigration, Russia, pornstars.
They turn their media into instigators instead of reporters.
Well, I have a little trouble finding a relation of Mr. Brennan’s treason to Brian's reaction to the Trump/Twitter controversy or the murder of Mr. Floyd. Brian, by the way, in case you didn’t know, is a libertarian like his dad, although in truth he’s a little (not much) to the left of me. For those incensed by another Trump hit piece by a ”fvcking liberal,” you are misidentifying the source of your anger.
Exactly. You can’t easily quantify harassment/abuse/etc. Those are the things that feed the smoldering fire while the murders like last week is what throws gasoline to create what’s happened. You just have to talk and truly listen to your black neighbors to identify this, it’s there. I will give Trump huge credit for his jail sentencing changes he’s put into law to help w some of the problems, unfortunately he ruins stuff like that w his moronic tweets.
I’m not angry and I can’t explain it to you in more simple terms.
Maybe quit pretending that reading criticism of your sons work doesn’t make you mad, Hoss.
You didn’t have to bring it here.
No, I’m not mad at criticism. You can’t be in Brian’s line of work, or related to someone in his line of work if you’re going to let criticism make you mad. You’d be mad all the time!
If a Republican said an orange was orange a Democrat would try to come up with a way to call it red.
Non-sequitur is non-sequitury.
I'm not in any way a Democrat, so I'm just gonna take that as an admission that you definitely are confused in establishing the truth of a specific factual assertion versus supporting your general opinion.
Last edited:
C’mon JD. His data may have not supported EXACTLY what he typed, but it gave more than enough directional data. I think you are being obtuse.
Good to see you are also confused with the distinction between proving a specific factual assertion and supporting a general opinion.
My question and request was pointed and direct, his response was obtuse.
It's you two that are being obtuse in that continued insistence that they are one and the same.
Last edited:
Stop with the BS! You are a liberal and a democrat! Your posts are very one sided but you write so you can ride the fence on certain issues. Plenty of posters see this about you, but you are always right and never wrong!
Can’t lose an argument. You have TDS, so don’t say otherwise.
Just as @cableok stated above, you will take a small mistake in his post and attack that but ignore what he was really talking about! You just have to win every argument so you’ll never change. Nobody wants a know it all lawyer unless they ask specificallyWell, okay then
A rational and well-reasoned response from you.
Another one that doesn't understand the difference between proving a pointed factual assertion and supporting a general opinion.
Your opinion and extreme dislike of me is duly noted.
Thanks for playing.
I don’t believe non-sequitury is a word. It’s a perfect day for bananafish.
