The Media -- Going Forward

[89Hen]

kalm's just upset that my post was based on liberal reality and not liberal derangement syndrome. He blocks out stuff like this from his leftfolk.

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

First off, you get a 15 yarder for using quotes three times in one question.

Second, your fishing skills have really declined. You OK?

Third, I never took you for a racist. You basically just said minorities are lazy.

[Winterborn]

Phew. I was worried for a moment that you would completely agree and then we would have nothing left to talk about other than the Ref's gave EWU the win back in......

I don't disagree in spirit of your second paragraph, but the "...ramifications of that ignorance now with avoidable illness and death, longer lock downs, and a compromised healthcare system which is starting to include EMT’s and 911 services." is that due to the mess our "leaders" made of it or people seeing that mess our leaders made and then deciding that they don't know anymore than they (the general public) do and taking decisions back into their own hands?

It goes back to my point:



The compromised healthcare is also indirectly caused by Healthcare CEO's cutting staff due to lack of people coming in for procedures (happened at two of the hospitals in our area) and their willingness to outsource nurses/services to the lowest bidder (has been going on for years). Sanford (operates in 26 states, including ND) is famous for treating staff like crap and only paying the bare minimum and overworking staff in the best of times, never mind in 2020. Never mind the investigation into Denny Sanford having possession of having child porn (and how the local media is all hushed on it due to his past donations (local example of how politics/media's double standard)).

That people don't trust institutions should come as no surprise considering the actions that people in and leading those institutions have done. It is kind of a chicken/egg problem, both have happened and are going to continue to happen. People's trust can be earned back by those institutions/individuals but that means that the "do as I say, not as I do" and playing politics will have to stop.

There are leadership failures all over the place on this one. That explains the lost trust in people who should be smart enough to see around it through skepticism and a variety of sources. Ironically, many of these same people crave a strong leader regardless of whether he makes the right call.

In this case, Bill Fette should be a hero in Fargo.

It is human nature to want to have somebody to pass the buck onto.


And touche.

[Winterborn]

That people don't trust institutions should come as no surprise considering the actions that people in and leading those institutions have done. It is kind of a chicken/egg problem, both have happened and are going to continue to happen. People's trust can be earned back by those institutions/individuals but that means that the "do as I say, not as I do" and playing politics will have to stop.

I find it interesting that Kalm doesn't trust people and as a result he wants us to put more trust in institutions that are staffed and run by ...
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
people.

Maybe he is really an agent for Skynet.

[kalm]

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

First off, you get a 15 yarder for using quotes three times in one question.

Second, your fishing skills have really declined. You OK?

Third, I never took you for a racist. You basically just said minorities are lazy.

1) I was simply reminding you of your strange argument using your choice of words.

2). I’m lacing up the expedition weight wool and neoprene to hit Rock Lake tomorrow to chase some browns and bows. 5 fish to hand is a good outing this time of year but they’ll run 16” with a chance at some really big ones. We’ll see.

3). How did I say minorities are lazy?

[UNI88]

kalm's just upset that my post was based on liberal reality and not liberal derangement syndrome. He blocks out stuff like this from his leftfolk.

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

I'd be interested to know which ones you believe are "culturally and historically correct". I will concede the Religion and History, but which others? A lot of the traits in that graphic can be applied to successful peoples throughout history regardless of the color of their skin.

Can you see the hypocrisy of the supposedly tolerant liberal left positioning whiteness as a bad thing? How is that different than arguing that African Americans are inferior. Our Eurocentric culture is a part of who we are and we shouldn't be embarrassed by it any more than a person of color should be embarrassed by their culture.

You shouldn't feel guilt or anger. I don't, but I'm also not going to meekly apologize for who I am and where I came from.

[89Hen]

First off, you get a 15 yarder for using quotes three times in one question.

Second, your fishing skills have really declined. You OK?

Third, I never took you for a racist. You basically just said minorities are lazy.

1) I was simply reminding you of your strange argument using your choice of words.

2). I’m lacing up the expedition weight wool and neoprene to hit Rock Lake tomorrow to chase some browns and bows. 5 fish to hand is a good outing this time of year but they’ll run 16” with a chance at some really big ones. We’ll see.

3). How did I say minorities are lazy?

Where did I say toxically? I can throw a few words from different posts of yours together and come up with some interesting things.

How is my argument strange? FRT, it wasn't even an argument. It was a statement based on a real graphic from a Smithsonian museum that receives public funding and by default it extremely liberal.

The museum has since backed down and apologized for the graphic. But you defended it above by saying those things really are true. I can only take that to mean that you think hard work is a white thing and minorities don't value it. I disagree, but I tend to be more accepting of other people than your average liberal.

[AZGrizFan]

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

I'd be interested to know which ones you believe are "culturally and historically correct". I will concede the Religion and History, but which others? A lot of the traits in that graphic can be applied to successful peoples throughout history regardless of the color of their skin.

Can you see the hypocrisy of the supposedly tolerant liberal left positioning whiteness as a bad thing? How is that different than arguing that African Americans are inferior. Our Eurocentric culture is a part of who we are and we shouldn't be embarrassed by it any more than a person of color should be embarrassed by their culture.

You shouldn't feel guilt or anger. I don't, but I'm also not going to meekly apologize for who I am and where I came from.

[kalm]

1) I was simply reminding you of your strange argument using your choice of words.

2). I’m lacing up the expedition weight wool and neoprene to hit Rock Lake tomorrow to chase some browns and bows. 5 fish to hand is a good outing this time of year but they’ll run 16” with a chance at some really big ones. We’ll see.

3). How did I say minorities are lazy?

Where did I say toxically? I can throw a few words from different posts of yours together and come up with some interesting things.

How is my argument strange? FRT, it wasn't even an argument. It was a statement based on a real graphic from a Smithsonian museum that receives public funding and by default it extremely liberal.

The museum has since backed down and apologized for the graphic. But you defended it above by saying those things really are true. I can only take that to mean that you think hard work is a white thing and minorities don't value it. I disagree, but I tend to be more accepting of other people than your average liberal.

1). Toxically was used by ‘88 and then you used toxic in your reply to his which was your reply right before the one I quoted here. We were still having the same argument right?

Your archiving and linking to old quotes skills are in decline.

2). Again your argument errrr...comments are strange. I can look at that poster without judgement either way and on its face value. Some of it I disagree with but much of it is correct. Hence it makes for conversation. It just didn’t upset me which seems to be what’s upsetting you or some jaw agape gotcha moment which you think you were granted.

[Winterborn]

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

I'd be interested to know which ones you believe are "culturally and historically correct". I will concede the Religion and History, but which others? A lot of the traits in that graphic can be applied to successful peoples throughout history regardless of the color of their skin.

Can you see the hypocrisy of the supposedly tolerant liberal left positioning whiteness as a bad thing? How is that different than arguing that African Americans are inferior. Our Eurocentric culture is a part of who we are and we shouldn't be embarrassed by it any more than a person of color should be embarrassed by their culture.

You shouldn't feel guilt or anger. I don't, but I'm also not going to meekly apologize for who I am and where I came from.

Well said.

I used to laugh and ignore items like what is on that poster that the Smithsonian put out until I was accused of being too objective and rational (along with having the philosophy of no work, no eat and my job is due to me being a man/white). Since then I better understand people who get offended and upset at people applying traits that are not limited to any race or gender and saying that your position or where you are at in life is due to your circumstances and not dedication/sacrifice.

Now I just pity people that need to make themselves feel better by dragging others down. If you cannot respect others for who they are and the circumstances they went through, you are going to have a very miserable life.

[kalm]

So the “reality” that justice is based on English common law is “toxically” “liberal”?



I suppose one could be offended at a few realities listed, especially in the competition part. There are even fewer untruths. Most of this is culturally and historically correct for better or for worse.

Why should I feel guilt, or anger? Why have you switched your attack from racial to ideological?

I'd be interested to know which ones you believe are "culturally and historically correct". I will concede the Religion and History, but which others? A lot of the traits in that graphic can be applied to successful peoples throughout history regardless of the color of their skin.

Can you see the hypocrisy of the supposedly tolerant liberal left positioning whiteness as a bad thing? How is that different than arguing that African Americans are inferior. Our Eurocentric culture is a part of who we are and we shouldn't be embarrassed by it any more than a person of color should be embarrassed by their culture.

You shouldn't feel guilt or anger. I don't, but I'm also not going to meekly apologize for who I am and where I came from.

I didn’t read the items as uniquely white or an insult. If that was the intent, it’s silly, and I refuse to admit my ancestors and culture embraced the scientific method!

I’ve slowly learned that humans can be wildly different, inconsistent and irrational and that if their opinions cause me grief, at some point I realize (hopefully quickly), that emotion is on me. It’s a poster. When that’s the case, I can let it bother me as an irrational assault on whiteness or I can just read it and think...nodding my head, sometimes and scratching my head sometimes.

So I’m with you on not meekly apologizing. I also reserve the right to try and walk a mile for the sake of compassion.

[89Hen]

Where did I say toxically? I can throw a few words from different posts of yours together and come up with some interesting things.

How is my argument strange? FRT, it wasn't even an argument. It was a statement based on a real graphic from a Smithsonian museum that receives public funding and by default it extremely liberal.

The museum has since backed down and apologized for the graphic. But you defended it above by saying those things really are true. I can only take that to mean that you think hard work is a white thing and minorities don't value it. I disagree, but I tend to be more accepting of other people than your average liberal.

1). Toxically was used by ‘88 and then you used toxic in your reply to his which was your reply right before the one I quoted here. We were still having the same argument right?

Your archiving and linking to old quotes skills are in decline.

2). Again your argument errrr...comments are strange. I can look at that poster without judgement either way and on its face value. Some of it I disagree with but much of it is correct. Hence it makes for conversation. It just didn’t upset me which seems to be what’s upsetting you or some jaw agape gotcha moment which you think you were granted.

Then stop using quotes and saying they were my words.

If you cared about this country, you'd be offended by the poster. It was clearly done to fuel the racial divide in this country. Maybe I just care more.

[89Hen]

I didn’t read the items as uniquely white or an insult.

None of them are an insult to whites. They were insults to non-whites. I think that's the part you're missing.

[kalm]

1). Toxically was used by ‘88 and then you used toxic in your reply to his which was your reply right before the one I quoted here. We were still having the same argument right?

Your archiving and linking to old quotes skills are in decline.

2). Again your argument errrr...comments are strange. I can look at that poster without judgement either way and on its face value. Some of it I disagree with but much of it is correct. Hence it makes for conversation. It just didn’t upset me which seems to be what’s upsetting you or some jaw agape gotcha moment which you think you were granted.

Then stop using quotes and saying they were my words.

If you cared about this country, you'd be offended by the poster. It was clearly done to fuel the racial divide in this country. Maybe I just care more.

UNI said toxically, you said toxic...

So it was created by whitey? You’re a champion of virtue!

[UNI88]

Then stop using quotes and saying they were my words.

If you cared about this country, you'd be offended by the poster. It was clearly done to fuel the racial divide in this country. Maybe I just care more.

UNI said toxically, you said toxic...

So it was created by whitey? You’re a champion of virtue!

"Don't trust whitey. Lord loves a working man; don't trust whitey."

I believe you've already agreed that if a white person designed that graphic it would be considered racist. Why would a POC design that graphic? Why would the museum display it? What are the underlying reasons/objectives?

[kalm]

UNI said toxically, you said toxic...

So it was created by whitey? You’re a champion of virtue!

"Don't trust whitey. Lord loves a working man; don't trust whitey."

I believe you've already agreed that if a white person designed that graphic it would be considered racist. Why would a POC design that graphic? Why would the museum display it? What are the underlying reasons/objectives?

Perhaps. I think I was agreeing with Pwns that it could be looked at as something from white supremacists years ago.

The intent is confusing either way and I just looked at each statement on their own.

[89Hen]

Perhaps. I think I was agreeing with Pwns that it could be looked at as something from white supremacists years ago.

The intent is confusing either way and I just looked at each statement on their own.

It's not confusing to me.

[kalm]

Perhaps. I think I was agreeing with Pwns that it could be looked at as something from white supremacists years ago.

The intent is confusing either way and I just looked at each statement on their own.

It's not confusing to me.

Of course it isn’t. Confusion things and desiring more information might be seen as scary and weak. It’s better to be decisive than correct.

[89Hen]

It's not confusing to me.

Of course it isn’t. Confusion things and desiring more information might be seen as scary and weak. It’s better to be decisive than correct.

Weak, yes. Scary, no.

Why would an African American museum make and post a graphic like that during a time of HUGE racial unrest? If you honestly think that's confusing maybe it's you who is scared to admit the reason.

[AZGrizFan]

It's not confusing to me.

Of course it isn’t. Confusion things and desiring more information might be seen as scary and weak. It’s better to be decisive than correct.

*confusing

And you’re actually correct. In many instances it’s better to be decisively wrong than indecisive. Then, when you realize you’ve made an error. Make another decisive move. Indecision kills, in many instances.

[kalm]

Of course it isn’t. Confusion things and desiring more information might be seen as scary and weak. It’s better to be decisive than correct.

Weak, yes. Scary, no.

Why would an African American museum make and post a graphic like that during a time of HUGE racial unrest? If you honestly think that's confusing maybe it's you who is scared to admit the reason.

I didn’t know the back story when I first read it nor do I really care all that much, but if the intent is racial why would anytime be acceptable? If it isn’t racial, it’s correct points are muddied by the rest. So yes, still confusing.

[kalm]

Of course it isn’t. Confusion things and desiring more information might be seen as scary and weak. It’s better to be decisive than correct.

*confusing

And you’re actually correct. In many instances it’s better to be decisively wrong than indecisive. Then, when you realize you’ve made an error. Make another decisive move. Indecision kills, in many instances.

As do impatience and hubris. Young bull: “lets run down this hill and fuck one of them cows.” Old bull: “why don’t we just walk down and fuck them all?”

[UNI88]

Weak, yes. Scary, no.

Why would an African American museum make and post a graphic like that during a time of HUGE racial unrest? If you honestly think that's confusing maybe it's you who is scared to admit the reason.

I didn’t know the back story when I first read it nor do I really care all that much, but if the intent is racial why would anytime be acceptable? If it isn’t racial, it’s correct points are muddied by the rest. So yes, still confusing.

Kind of like the 1619 Project.

[kalm]

I didn’t know the back story when I first read it nor do I really care all that much, but if the intent is racial why would anytime be acceptable? If it isn’t racial, it’s correct points are muddied by the rest. So yes, still confusing.

Kind of like the 1619 Project.

I’m not familiar with the 1619 Project. Will it offend my white sensibilities?

[andy7171]

"I don't care that much" Kalmy admits defeat.

I'm awarding this thread to 88 and 89.

...and holy shit you are a bunch of stubborn mother fuckers.



"I don't know that much about 1619" PPPPPSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH

[kalm]

"I don't care that much" Kalmy admits defeat.

I'm awarding this thread to 88 and 89.

...and holy shit you are a bunch of stubborn mother fuckers.



"I don't know that much about 1619" PPPPPSSSSSSSHHHHHHHH

I literally had to Google it. Post-partisans don’t pay much attention to that type of horseplay.