Waco-How Long Before....................

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

I'd be more open to the idea that everyone holds a prejudice or two than I am to the convenient notion that everyone is a little bit racist. You can be prejudice against gays, women, liberals, southerners, nerds, sports fans, the homeless, cat people, dog lovers, etc. And that prejudice can be as simple as prejudging them in some way. Doesn't mean you hate anyone, and it doesn't mean you are harboring an "inherent racial bias."

The piece that last12exit posted showed legitimate scientific evidence of inherent racial bias. Studies of all sorts find it over and over again, if you two don't want to accept it, it doesn't change reality.

rgambs said:

Don't want to change your views, just discredit the studies...not based on methodology or credibility or anything, just based on general distrust of studies.
Again, disagree all you like, reality doesn't care.

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

rgambs said:

Don't want to change your views, just discredit the studies...not based on methodology or credibility or anything, just based on general distrust of studies.
Again, disagree all you like, reality doesn't care.

You create a new eggshell term for people to tip-toe around, label people you don't like using it racists for doing so, and then claim your political views are "reality"? OK dude. You have a certain view of the world. Not everyone agrees. THAT is reality.

It doesn't matter if people agree or not, reality is not subjective, it is objective. This isn't about political views, it is about verifiable scientific results. Again and again, racial bias has been proven from childhood through adulthood in well-designed and diverse study methodologies. Racial bias is real, deal with it.

callen said:

JimmyV said:

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

I'd be more open to the idea that everyone holds a prejudice or two than I am to the convenient notion that everyone is a little bit racist. You can be prejudice against gays, women, liberals, southerners, nerds, sports fans, the homeless, cat people, dog lovers, etc. And that prejudice can be as simple as prejudging them in some way. Doesn't mean you hate anyone, and it doesn't mean you are harboring an "inherent racial bias."

The piece that last12exit posted showed legitimate scientific evidence of inherent racial bias. Studies of all sorts find it over and over again, if you two don't want to accept it, it doesn't change reality.

Studies of course are never wrong. How dare anyone disagree.

Jimmy use my thought patterns to come to my conclusion but knew studies would back them up.

I do though agree with you and last 12 that thread topic may be pushing racist aspect and we do fall back at times when not warranted.

dignin said:

JimmyV said:

callen said:

JimmyV said:

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

I'd be more open to the idea that everyone holds a prejudice or two than I am to the convenient notion that everyone is a little bit racist. You can be prejudice against gays, women, liberals, southerners, nerds, sports fans, the homeless, cat people, dog lovers, etc. And that prejudice can be as simple as prejudging them in some way. Doesn't mean you hate anyone, and it doesn't mean you are harboring an "inherent racial bias."

The piece that last12exit posted showed legitimate scientific evidence of inherent racial bias. Studies of all sorts find it over and over again, if you two don't want to accept it, it doesn't change reality.

Studies of course are never wrong. How dare anyone disagree.

Jimmy use my thought patterns to come to my conclusion but knew studies would back them up.

I do though agree with you and last 12 that thread topic may be pushing racist aspect and we do fall back at times when not warranted.

We do fall back on race when it is not warranted. Too often, in my opinion. Then legitimate discussions of the issue become watered down.

This thread is about the issue of media and race. If we can't discuss that here, where can we?

If that makes some of you uncomfortable or pissed off, don't click on the thread.

Halifax2TheMax said:

JimmyV said:

dignin said:

JimmyV said:

callen said:

JimmyV said:

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

I'd be more open to the idea that everyone holds a prejudice or two than I am to the convenient notion that everyone is a little bit racist. You can be prejudice against gays, women, liberals, southerners, nerds, sports fans, the homeless, cat people, dog lovers, etc. And that prejudice can be as simple as prejudging them in some way. Doesn't mean you hate anyone, and it doesn't mean you are harboring an "inherent racial bias."

The piece that last12exit posted showed legitimate scientific evidence of inherent racial bias. Studies of all sorts find it over and over again, if you two don't want to accept it, it doesn't change reality.

Studies of course are never wrong. How dare anyone disagree.

Jimmy use my thought patterns to come to my conclusion but knew studies would back them up.

I do though agree with you and last 12 that thread topic may be pushing racist aspect and we do fall back at times when not warranted.

We do fall back on race when it is not warranted. Too often, in my opinion. Then legitimate discussions of the issue become watered down.

This thread is about the issue of media and race. If we can't discuss that here, where can we?

If that makes some of you uncomfortable or pissed off, don't click on the thread.

Please. The thread was an attempt at fitting a square peg (Twin Peaks) into a round hole (Baltimore, Ferguson, etc). Not surprisingly it didn't fit.

No, I started this thread asking why the bikers hadn't been referred to as thugs. I wasn't the one who injected race into this thread. So a bunch of bikers who show up at a bar armed with bats, knives, brass knuckles and guns to settle a dispute over who wears what fucking patch where and with who's permission, resulting in the deaths of nine and injuring of 18, shouldn't be referred to as thugs but rioters protesting another death of an unarmed innocent at the hands of the police, resulting in the burning and looting of 200 businesses, should be referred to as thugs? What crime did Freddie Gray commit? And since when is death the sentence for resisting arrest, eluding police, selling single cigarettes on the sidewalk, assaulting a police officer or walking through a gated community with skittles and a soft drink?

Take race out of it and you still have bias. You may not like this difficult discussion but yes, bias exists in these threads and on this forum. It's inherent. One small example of it is in one of the police abuse threads or one similar, there's a sympathy fest for the California dude beaten to death by the police. Abhorrent? Absolutely. Was it wrong? Absolutely. But the guy had 93 previous encounters with law enforcement. Well, maybe he should have complied after the first 92 encounters and stopped being a dick. It's still wrong and the cops should be prosecuted. Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice and the couple in Cleveland didn't get 92 or 93 previous encounters with law enforcement before their demise. Yet, the guy in California was a victim of police abuse, government overreach, etc, etc. The individuals I listed were pilloried for resisting, should have been law abiding, etc. and the aftermath or results were referred to as thugs. The bikers are just bikers. And yes, the bikers were known to law enforcement for having engaged in previous criminal activity. Do you think they were known to law enforcement because of their charity runs? What was Freddie Gray's criminal record?

Jimmy V you asked if I was keeping score. What's the relevance? Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh? What's the relevance? And if I am? So what? But at least I know who's losing. And if you haven't noticed, rioting is often the final, desperate scream for change that has to happen before real social change takes place and this country has a rich tradition of it (as opposed to hockey, surf fest or pumpkin fest riots). By your definition, the burning of the Gaspee and the Boston Tea Party would have been better handled by petitioning for redress and the culperts jailed as thugs. And what is the "legitimate issue to be discussed?"

Halifax2TheMax said:

JimmyV said:

Halifax2TheMax said:

JimmyV said:

dignin said:

JimmyV said:

callen said:

JimmyV said:

rgambs said:

JimmyV said:

I'd be more open to the idea that everyone holds a prejudice or two than I am to the convenient notion that everyone is a little bit racist. You can be prejudice against gays, women, liberals, southerners, nerds, sports fans, the homeless, cat people, dog lovers, etc. And that prejudice can be as simple as prejudging them in some way. Doesn't mean you hate anyone, and it doesn't mean you are harboring an "inherent racial bias."

The piece that last12exit posted showed legitimate scientific evidence of inherent racial bias. Studies of all sorts find it over and over again, if you two don't want to accept it, it doesn't change reality.

Studies of course are never wrong. How dare anyone disagree.

Jimmy use my thought patterns to come to my conclusion but knew studies would back them up.

I do though agree with you and last 12 that thread topic may be pushing racist aspect and we do fall back at times when not warranted.

We do fall back on race when it is not warranted. Too often, in my opinion. Then legitimate discussions of the issue become watered down.

This thread is about the issue of media and race. If we can't discuss that here, where can we?

If that makes some of you uncomfortable or pissed off, don't click on the thread.

Please. The thread was an attempt at fitting a square peg (Twin Peaks) into a round hole (Baltimore, Ferguson, etc). Not surprisingly it didn't fit.

No, I started this thread asking why the bikers hadn't been referred to as thugs. I wasn't the one who injected race into this thread. So a bunch of bikers who show up at a bar armed with bats, knives, brass knuckles and guns to settle a dispute over who wears what fucking patch where and with who's permission, resulting in the deaths of nine and injuring of 18, shouldn't be referred to as thugs but rioters protesting another death of an unarmed innocent at the hands of the police, resulting in the burning and looting of 200 businesses, should be referred to as thugs? What crime did Freddie Gray commit? And since when is death the sentence for resisting arrest, eluding police, selling single cigarettes on the sidewalk, assaulting a police officer or walking through a gated community with skittles and a soft drink?

Take race out of it and you still have bias. You may not like this difficult discussion but yes, bias exists in these threads and on this forum. It's inherent. One small example of it is in one of the police abuse threads or one similar, there's a sympathy fest for the California dude beaten to death by the police. Abhorrent? Absolutely. Was it wrong? Absolutely. But the guy had 93 previous encounters with law enforcement. Well, maybe he should have complied after the first 92 encounters and stopped being a dick. It's still wrong and the cops should be prosecuted. Freddie Gray, Michael Brown, Trayvon Martin, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice and the couple in Cleveland didn't get 92 or 93 previous encounters with law enforcement before their demise. Yet, the guy in California was a victim of police abuse, government overreach, etc, etc. The individuals I listed were pilloried for resisting, should have been law abiding, etc. and the aftermath or results were referred to as thugs. The bikers are just bikers. And yes, the bikers were known to law enforcement for having engaged in previous criminal activity. Do you think they were known to law enforcement because of their charity runs? What was Freddie Gray's criminal record?

Jimmy V you asked if I was keeping score. What's the relevance? Do you listen to Rush Limbaugh? What's the relevance? And if I am? So what? But at least I know who's losing. And if you haven't noticed, rioting is often the final, desperate scream for change that has to happen before real social change takes place and this country has a rich tradition of it (as opposed to hockey, surf fest or pumpkin fest riots). By your definition, the burning of the Gaspee and the Boston Tea Party would have been better handled by petitioning for redress and the culperts jailed as thugs. And what is the "legitimate issue to be discussed?"

I did not ask if you were keeping score.

Step back and ask yourself...if you weren't injecting race into the thread...why bother comparing Twin Peaks to Baltimore? If not a statement on race, what possible comparison is there? Of course you were injecting race.

When you take to the streets to burn down businesses in your own neighborhood, you are a thug. When you fire weapons at police in a parking lot, you are also a thug. The difference is that one group was also easily identifiable as bikers, a term that to many means almost the same thing. That different terminology was used didn't indicate a racial bias...that was a projection.

Sorry, my bad. It was 30 who asked if I was keeping score. 30?

Bikers are bikers but rioters are not rioters? Rioters are thugs but bikers are bikers? And no, I was injecting bias. You inferred race and someone else injected it into the thread. Go back and read the definitions of racism and bias. Some on here got defensive and inferred or thought I was calling them racist. Wouldn't rioters be easily identifiable as rioters?

Again, why the two different terms and one being used for one group but not the other? Why is that?