Bloggingheads Community

Bloggingheads Community (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/index.php)
-   Diavlog comments (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=9)
-   -   Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko) (http://bloggingheads.tv/forum/showthread.php?t=3804)

TwinSwords 08-27-2009 11:48 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127054)
Facetiousness man. Of course commentary can be and is racist, but it isn't objectively so, like a white guy dragging a black man from behind a truck would be.

Are you Sarah Palin's speechwriter?

claymisher 08-28-2009 12:02 AM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TwinSwords (Post 127120)
Are you Sarah Palin's speechwriter?

That's right, anything short of murder isn't racist.

stephanie 08-28-2009 09:07 AM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127054)
Facetiousness man. Of course commentary can be and is racist, but it isn't objectively so, like a white guy dragging a black man from behind a truck would be.

Come now, we don't know why he's dragged the black guy behind his truck.

This notion that physical abuse can be called racism but writing only "some might think it's racist, but I'd certainly not presume to judge" makes no sense other than as an attempt to insulate writing from criticism.

stephanie 08-28-2009 09:34 AM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by badhatharry (Post 127003)
Someone needs to look into this David Goldhill guy. He claims to be a democrat and business man but he is saying exactly what that CEO from Whole Foods, Mackey, is saying. And yet he claims to have no agenda. Hmmmm.

I guess I'm not understanding the point. The general feel I get is sarcasm or attempted parody, so is this supposed to be how liberals are reacting? Yglesias' comments are probably a better example of how liberals are really likely to react.

Quote:

He says shopping around for health care would probably encourage competition. (conservative wingnut).
Um, of course it would. That doesn't mean a purely competitive-based one is the ideal solution, given the other aspects of the issue, but it's hardly wingnut to talk about that aspect. I, and other liberals, have been saying that it would be helpful if opponents of the current health care reform proposals would argue honestly and talk about what they would rather do instead rather than pretending there's no problem (when they've said otherwise plenty of times in the past) or making up nonsense about death panels. I've seen plenty of kudos, including my own, for the conservatives (like some of those over at the American Scene) who approach the issue more constructively.

It's pretty clear that there are lots of shortcomings about the current situation that many, whether on the right or left, reformist types could agree upon, and thus even aspects of a solution upon which there could be some agreement, which was demonstrated in this diavlog. There are going to be other points of disagreement.

None of this explains Bob's ranting about Mackey, but I'm going to blame that on back pain and a misunderstanding about what Whole Foods represents or something. I also kind of think the overreaction (IMO) by many to Mackey explaining his views is probably driven by the nastiness and dishonesty in this debate so far and frustration, perhaps, also, and I'd say that the nastiness and dishonesty seems to me to have primarily come from one side (the right, to be clear), but granted I have a particular perspective, much as I try to be fair and to understand where other people are coming from. I've been honest that I'm freaked out by the whole birther wing of the right in part because I so don't get them (unlike plenty of other conservative POV or subsets that I do get, even if I disagree).

Quote:

He points out that providers don't even know how much they charge. (ridiculous!)
Again, as a parody, hardly working, because numerous liberals interested in the health care issue have pointed this out.

Quote:

And that when you're spending other people's money, you're not concerned with the price (typical concervative twisting of the facts!)
My last comment fits here too.

It's why the free market based hysteria about changing the current system is so dishonest, as all these problems exist right now. However, the public discomfort about changing things doesn't have a thing to do with these reformist ideas about what the problem is. It's instead the fear that I might lose my employer-provided (and thus subsidized and not subject to competition in many ways) health care or that Medicare might change. Consistently the public proves that despite an attachment to the most simplistic free-market rhetoric (socialism bad, government bad, rugged individualism good), most people really don't want real government hands off at all. Middle-class-based government programs are generally widely supported.

The liberal reformers you are seemingly (since I'm not sure) mocking are actually probably much more likely to be interested in trying to work in some of the workable free market principles than the average person freaking out in the current debate about how things might get worse for him or her. Which, again, I think was generally supported by this diavlog and the nature of the discussion between Yglesias and Balko.

Lyle 08-28-2009 06:08 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
True to the first part and I thought about writing about it, but was too lazy. There would have to be racial animus involved, like you say. It's what makes hate crimes laws so ridiculous. How the hell do you prove someone is a racist? Not as easy as it seems, which was kind of the point of picking at nikkibongs, absolutist statement "of course this is racist".

stephanie 08-28-2009 07:27 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127247)
True to the first part and I thought about writing about it, but was too lazy. There would have to be racial animus involved, like you say. It's what makes hate crimes laws so ridiculous. How the hell do you prove someone is a racist? Not as easy as it seems, which was kind of the point of picking at nikkibongs, absolutist statement "of course this is racist".

Oh, I was mainly just being sarcastic, actually. However, I do agree that the motives behind an action are not always clear and you could easily punch a black guy for a reason other than race. Burn a cross on his yard, on the other hand, there's less room for plausible deniability.

...which, to circle back around to my point, is why I think it's wrong to differentiate between racist violence and racist writings.* If anything, the writings will tend to be more clear, since they will actually explain your thoughts, rather than leaving us to infer them from action.

I feel for Ron Paul fans somewhat, because I think what he represents to a lot of people is something that would be good to have in our political system (something of a modern day Barry Goldwater, on the one hand, and on the other a throwback to when the Republican Party was a lot more skeptical of foreign involvement), but I don't see how the numerous articles in his newsletter (and it's unclear whether he wrote them or not, apparently, but they were from his mouthpiece) aren't racist, as well as offensive in a variety of other ways.

*I mean in terms of whether one should call them "racist" or not. Obviously the violence is a crime and the writings not.

Lyle 08-29-2009 04:29 AM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
All true, all true... and I'm glad you added the qualifier at the end. Cause their a difference between being a racist like David Duke and the two crackers who tied up James Byrd to the back of their truck. The former isn't a criminal because of his racism (tax evasion), while the latter two apparently are (more so because of kidnapping and murder though).

However, take Rush Limbaugh or some of the other right-of-center radio people. They say things that get them called racist all the time, but never do they approach something like one of those Ron Paul newsletters. Just writing something like, "tied a black man to the back of a truck and dragged him along" gets certain people all riled up as if it means something (see supra).

stephanie 08-29-2009 01:12 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127334)
Just writing something like, "tied a black man to the back of a truck and dragged him along" gets certain people all riled up as if it means something (see supra).

But it does. In context, it's an obvious allusion to a specific event, which we all know was racist.

Lyle 08-29-2009 03:30 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Well, yes, but we weren't in any racist context. :)

nikkibong 08-29-2009 04:12 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127334)
All true, all true... and I'm glad you added the qualifier at the end. Cause their a difference between being a racist like David Duke and the two crackers who tied up James Byrd to the back of their truck. The former isn't a criminal because of his racism (tax evasion), while the latter two apparently are (more so because of kidnapping and murder though).

However, take Rush Limbaugh or some of the other right-of-center radio people. They say things that get them called racist all the time, but never do they approach something like one of those Ron Paul newsletters. Just writing something like, "tied a black man to the back of a truck and dragged him along" gets certain people all riled up as if it means something (see supra).

The fact that you continue to glibly refer to this horrific event does not reflect well on you, Lyle.

pampl 08-30-2009 01:03 AM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127247)
True to the first part and I thought about writing about it, but was too lazy. There would have to be racial animus involved, like you say. It's what makes hate crimes laws so ridiculous. How the hell do you prove someone is a racist? Not as easy as it seems, which was kind of the point of picking at nikkibongs, absolutist statement "of course this is racist".

That's retarded. Murder laws also require proving intent. So do conspiracy and tax evasion charges, for example. The only reason they aren't "ridiculuous" is they don't have a cottage industry of pundits trying desperately to get people to turn a blind eye to those motives.

edit: Now that I think about it, though, that's changed. With Republicans talking openly of revolution and killing the President and other federal employees soon we'll see charges of treason and murder and conspiracy to commit murder being labelled "ridiculuous".

Lyle 08-30-2009 02:44 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
There's nothing glib about it. It's just a description of an event. How do you think lawyers talk about horrific events Nikkibong? Do they go in to detail or do they avoid specifics? Do doctors doing an autopsy just say, "he was killed" or do they say he was dragged from behind a car and his skull was crushed by it hitting the ground time and time again?

If I was prosecuting a man for raping a child, I wouldn't just say he raped a child, I'd say the 54 year old man forcibly penetrated the 6 year old girl with his penis... while she was crying and screaming No!!!

Lyle 08-30-2009 02:49 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
No, I don't think it is "retarded"... whatever "retarded" means. Murder is murder. James Byrd's murderers would have still been prosecuted and likely sentenced to death on first degree murder charges. Prosecutions are made more complicated by having to further prove racial, sexist, or homophobic animus as well. It is a waste of time, effort, and money.

pampl 08-30-2009 09:15 PM

Re: Wisdom Teeth and Sprained Wrists (Matthew Yglesias & Radley Balko)
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lyle (Post 127468)
No, I don't think it is "retarded"... whatever "retarded" means. Murder is murder. James Byrd's murderers would have still been prosecuted and likely sentenced to death on first degree murder charges. Prosecutions are made more complicated by having to further prove racial, sexist, or homophobic animus as well. It is a waste of time, effort, and money.

Lyle, just because you figured out that cows go moo and dogs go bow-wow doesn't mean you can start getting cocky. State prosecutors are vastly better judges of how they should spend their time than you are.

You failed to respond to the point that murder ALSO requires more complicated efforts of proving intent than a manslaughter charge would.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:40 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.