Godless

Lol! That's actually "for the win".

I haven't been following this very closely, but I know the Dem running to replace Kyrsten Sinema is using the regulatory rollbacks to torch her.

Recent remarks from Mike Pence: I couldn't find video, but this is from last night's Gridiron Dinner. https://www.axios.com/2023/03/12/pence-trump-jan-6-accountable

I said that I generally disbelieve that anti-xyz bigotry surrounds us. I probably expounded more than I needed to, but I gave you a clear answer up front. We bash heads a lot on here and while I don't know you personally, I have no reason to believe that you're so close-minded to believe that any form of liberal social activism is bigotry. You clearly believe that the zealots/bigots on my side are more numerous and influential than I do. That's fine. You have your life experiences and I have mine. I apologize if I overthought your line of questioning.

Your original question seemed to suggest that you believe that we are, in fact, surrounded by those hateful anti-'s. I wanted to make sure I was clear about how I feel on the matter. But yes, I suppose I was being a tad redundant.

Generally, yes. Do the people you're describing exist? Sure, but I think you're giving their influence too much credit. And I'll reiterate, greater equity for one (or more) group(s) doesn't mean oppression for others. Fighting for racial justice isn't anti-white. Fighting for women's rights isn't anti-male. Fighting for LGBTQ rights isn't anti-straight. Fighting for secular ideas isn't anti-Christian. Sure, bigots exist in those movements, and they're no better than the bigots they're fighting against. But I'd hardly say that they "surround" anyone, though to be fair I've never been to your hippie corner of the PNW. Maybe it's worse there. 🤷‍♂️

True. I also think that MAGA culture pushed quite a few liberals into leftist territory and they discovered that leftists like guns.

For starters, because I don't believe that a lot of that is anything more than privileged people freaking out because their privilege is slowly crumbling. There's a culture war raging in the US right now, and I'll gladly recognize that people on both sides of it have gotten overzealous in recent years. Liberals, like conservatives, never get everything 100% right. But I generally think that the right doth protest too much on a lot of issues.

I wasn't necessarily talking about Kaepernick specifically in that part of my post. A better "rags to riches" story would be Lebron James, raised in a poor household by a single mother who was 16 when he was born. And there are a myriad of other professional athletes with similar backgrounds. If nothing else, Kaepernick has probably used the life experiences of some of his NFL peers to hone his views on race. He may not share the life experiences of his peers, but that doesmean he can't learn from them. And as far as community goes, the black community is one that's sometimes defined by nothing else than skin color. People who cheekily ask why there's no "White History Month" take for granted the fact that their heritage is often well-documented going back several centuries. For many black Americans, their known family and cultural history begins on a Southern plantation. Some of their oldest geneological documents are records from slave auctions. THAT'S something that Kaepernick likely has in common with his peers. Obviously that doesn't fully define him now, it seems he's trying to make an honest attempt at honoring his racial identity despite his privileged upbringing. I get that it doesn't make much sense to the outside observer, myself included, but I think it's important to respect the cultural identity of people who had their culture ripped away from them in the early days of our country's history. I'd argue that there's probably at least a small amount of correlation between racism borne of stupidity and racism borne of genuine malice and hate. Ignorance and stupidity are often the seeds that grow into hate and prejudice, and I think it could be argued that the former often encourages and enables the latter. It's true that stupidity and racism will never be erased from society, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try to correct it when we see it.

Very well-said. I appreciate your perspective on this. I feel like the last bit could have been left out, though. Is that what you think his activism was about? I see statements like this a lot about athletes (almost always black ones) who express concern about race issues in the US. It's always "ungrateful millionaires" this and "rich crybabies" that, with seemingly little consideration for the fact that a lot of these athletes come from very ordinary (at best) backgrounds, and a lot of them have friends and families who are still part of ordinary, or in some cases impoverished, communities. They hit the lottery, so to speak, and they want to look after the people who helped them get there.

I remember him. Desperation can be a silent but dangerous killer. I hope his family has been able to find peace.

No argument here.

This is a complicated comparison for a variety of reasons. 1. The scale - Obviously, we're comparing a single event in one location to ongoing events nationwide. I do believe it's accurate to say that the George Floyd protests were mostly peaceful. But yes, it's also accurate to say that they were more violent than the 1/6 protest because there was more damage caused and more people hurt. If 1/6 had been a nationwide event targeting government buildings in several states, there probably would have been a lot more violence and people hurt/killed. 2. The target - Private property (mostly retail stores) vs. A federal government building occupied by the entirety of the US government and the Vice President of the United States. Imo, the protection one of those merits a more loose ROE than the other, and it ain't Cub Grocery. As I said, I'm glad that more people weren't hurt or killed on 1/6, but I recall watching some of the footage and wondering why there wasn't a more violent response. 3. Agitators - Unlike 1/6, we have law enforcement on record saying that some of the George Floyd violence was instigated by opposition groups like conservative agitators and white supremacists. https://abcnews.go.com/US/man-helped-ignite-george-floyd-riots-identified-white/story?id=72051536 https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-54670557 https://www.justice.gov/usao-nv/pr/joint-terrorism-task-force-charges-three-men-who-allegedly-sought-exploit-protests-las In at least one instance, the police themselves were complicit in the escalation of violence. https://www.thedailybeast.com/seattle-police-faked-reports-of-armed-proud-boys-to-spook-george-floyd-protesters-watchdog-report-says To be clear, I'm not trying to suggest that the BLM protesters were entirely peaceful or blameless. There's certainly cause to vilify Antifa sympathizers for their role in violence. I just think there's more nuance to it than some people are willing to give credit for.

I think you mistook Carb's words for mine.

I'd imagine that the 1/6 protest was similar to the BLM protests in that there were large swaths of peaceful protesters and smaller factions of violent ones, with the latter getting the bulk of the media attention. The difference here is that instead of a Starbucks or a grocery store, the target of the violence was the United States Congress. My understanding (which could admittedly be incorrect) is that the door that Babbitt was "poking her head through"* was the only thing separating her and the other protesters from members of Congress. If that's true, then I think it was a justified shooting. An unarmed mob can be just as dangerous as a single gunman, if not more so. I'm glad, but also a bit surprised, that there were no other protesters shot by police/security/secret service that day. *The video that's been widely circulated clearly shows that Babbit was trying to climb through the window, not simply looking through it. Obstensibly, this is because the door was barricaded, which tracks with the supposition that members of Congress were beyond that door. Some of those who work forces.... How are you defining "agitators"? Because I know for a fact that there are multiple individuals who are seen assaulting police officers in video footage who have either been convicted for their crimes or are awaiting their day in court for it.