Re: Why Won't You Answer, Glenn V.?

On Sunday, March 21, 2021 at 3:03:46 AM UTC+1, BT George wrote:
Brock, just a couple of comments here.


> > Aren't you aware that the media lie a lot? Remember, they said Trump 
> > called white supremacists "good people." 

This is a clip what Trump actually said about Charlottesville:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmaZR8E12bs

Calling Neo Nazis and a range of other right wing extremists org's present 
in Charlottesville "very fine people".

Remember what they chanted? Thousands and thousands of them?

"Jews will not replace us!.....Jews will not replace us!....."

These are the facts about Charlottesville. Now, I don't know how Breitbart 
and other right wing outlets have portrayed this to their audiences, but 
judging from some of the things said in this thread, the above seems to be 
a complete surprise.

Or, right wing media have simply lied about this - the discussion in this 
thread unfortunately gives me no reason to believe otherwise. Now, some 
people here don't seem to agree that this is racist, that's another and 
far more chilling possibility. But that's not something I'll dig into 
here.

IOW, what John is referring to above as (left wing) media lies about this, 
where a young woman was killed by some crack pot idiot, are no lies at 
all. As I've stated a couple of times in this thread, unfortunately John 
is constantly talking about things of which he doesn't have a clue.


> >
> Come on .John. This is still *me*. I believe by now you know me well 
> enough to know I am *well* aware the MSM often lies and distorts 
> right-wing stands! (Fact: So does some a the right wing 
> media---depending on the source.) incidentally Glenn knows very well I 
> feel form private conversations that I fell that way and am *passionate* 
> about the injustice and he has even agreed he has seen that too sometimes 
> and also disapproves. But as my other comments make clear, I would think 
> since you and he are debating this at particular *issue* at length, this 
> should be something your own research would have confirmed or denied.
> > And they lied about a call he made to a Georgia official. 
> >
> > And they lied about a guard at the Capitol in Washington being 
> > bludgeoned by a fire extinguisher. 
> > >If you answer that, then he will 
> > >be in no place to refuse to directly confirm his position on banning Trump 
> > >and other Conservatives. 
> > > 
> > Again, nonsense. I don't even know whether his polling station claim 
> > is true. 
> > 
> > But he knows perfectly well whether he approves of Trump being banned. 
> > 
> > Why do you think he won't answer? 
> >
> I am withholding judgement for now---because I know on past discussions. 
> Based on those, I believe it unlikely he has a good feeling about that 
> kind of censorship. His point seems to be he is still awaiting your 
> answer to his questions and then he will address yours, because he is 
> accusing you of changing the subject. Regarding the answers he says he 
> wants, if he is right about it targeting certain districts, it's a valid 
> question that wouldn't hurt you to answer and leave him *no excuse* to 
> remain silent on this point. Of course, if he is wrong about it being 
> only in certain districts, then he is missing a key justification for why 
> the Republican efforts in Georgia are so bad. (And as I already said, 
> feeding hungry voters is generally suspect; all the more so if it can be 
> done by partisans who want to influence a vote, so that doesn't bother me 
> much on the Republican effort.) So maybe then all you need to do is point 
> out how that is a misrepresentation of the Republican effort. 

Let me clarify what I was referring to, as far as reducing polling 
stations in Georgia, I wasn't all that clear about this, agreed.

In 2013, a split decision - along party lines - by the US Supreme Court 
made some changes to the Voting Rights Act. Since then, Georgia's 
notoriety as the leading US state in voter disenfranchisement has gone 
overboard.

They since, have closed **213 polling stations**, many of them in rural 
areas, heavily populated by black voters.

These are the facts, Brock. Of which John is unaware. And that's fine, no 
one who hasn't looked into this, would know about it.

But it's not acceptable to argue as if these things didn't happen, and 
what the motives are. This is why I mentioned Stacey Abrams previously, 
she has been taking on this problem ever since, and that has a large part 
to do with why Trump lost here, and why those two Senate seats were also 
lost in this last election. It's got nothing to do with voter fraud, as 
the state's republican election officials have repeatedly said. It was all 
about hard work to overcome voter disenfranchisement.

Someone above talked about (in general, not about Georgia specifically) 
"why throw money at elections, it doesn't solve anything".

And that's exactly why I argued, and will continue to do so, that 
elections need proper resources allocated, without this you simply cannot 
have free and fair elections. It's a matter of fact. The US, or Georgia, 
are in no shortage of money. Period. The shortage is elsewhere, and I know 
exactly where that happens to be.

I hope this clarifies things.

> 
> > .John 
> > ------------------------------- 
> > http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/home.htm