Church yesterday

 At church yesterday there was discussion of how to communicate with people who have different views an the issues of the day in a way that honored and pointed to Christ.

While I agree that as believers we need to do a better job of representing Christ on our fallen world, and that a big part of that is things like being willing to listen, to understand, and the tone of our responses.  Yet, I can't help but wonder what role Truth plays in all of this.   How do we seek the Truth and seek to share the Truth, when all too many of us are navigating these times based on feelings?   

I was in a conversation with someone who kept insisting that I needed to honor their feelings and emotions regarding certain things.   Then they complained that my response to their feelings/emotions was to bring facts and Truth into the conversation.   Now, I'll own the fact that I probably didn't do a good job of communicating the Truth in a manner that helped move the conversation forward.  I'll also acknowledge that I could have done a better job of acknowledging their feelings and understanding that those feelings were very real.

So, how do we balance Truth with feelings?  How do we acknowledge that this is at it's root an issue of sin and the spiritual, while understanding that there are some societal/governmental parts of the conversation as well.

It seems as if Christ is Truth, then Truth should be part of the conversation. 

I don't know

 https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/06/will-todays-riots-spur-electoral-backlash-like-1967s.html

The headline to the NY Intelligencer says plenty.    "Will Today's Riots Spur Electoral Backlash like 1967"s"

It seems like common sense to suspect that the continued news showing Democrat run cities, in flames and the lack of a consistent message of condemnation of the violence from some/many on the left, that these riots would help Trump in November.

I've heard a couple of interesting (although contradictory) things from some on the left. Kamala Harris recently announced that the protests/riots will continue regardless of who wins the election.  While others seem to suggest that the riots will stop if Biden is elected.   I'd argue that the recent spate of "The riots are all Trump's fault" could be construed as the latter of those two.

I think it's clear from the looking at what's been happening that (at least some) on the DFL side really have little interest in actions that might minimize the rioters.  Especially if those actions might possibly reflect well on Trump.   In hindsight, the one exception might actually be the Walz/Frey combination.  Even though that fiddled (figuratively) while MSP burned (literally), their willingness to finally use the necessary force to stop the riots was relatively successful.   They even brought the guard in quickly after the idiocy around the murder suicide.

It's hard to say, at this point, how much this ongoing unrest will hurt Biden in November.  I think it's safe to say that it probably won't help him too much, but beyond that, who knows.   

Some would claim that the riots help Trump.  Although, I think many will criticize him no matter what.  If he sends in federal resources and stops everything, then he's a fascist dictator.  If he allows the states and cities to handle these problems (like our federalist system of government suggests is appropriate), then he'll be blamed for causing the riots.  Despite his numerous offers of help.

I think that my biggest question is, "If the riots will/could hurt Biden (or if they aren't going to help Biden),  and if one presumes that the rioters are more likely to be Biden voters, then why would they continue on a course that's likely to hurt their candidate?

Given that the genesis of this recent trend of protesting, rioting, and destruction to protest verdicts that folks don't agree with goes back to the P-BO administration, then is it rational to a) assign all the blame to Trump and B) assume that things will suddenly improve with a Biden win?

If Biden has the moral authority to persuade the rioters to stand down, why hasn't he used it yet?

If it's wrong for Trump to claim that the chaos in DFL controlled cities could/will be exacerbated by a Biden win, then isn't it wrong for DFL candidates to blame Trump for problems/failures at the city/county/state levels of government over which he has no control?

Finally, on a positive note.

Federal law enforcement agents (primarily the Marshall's service) freed many children over the last few days.  How about a shout out to LEO when they do something worthy of praise?

Apology

 I’m going to apologize here, for my mistake over at Dan’s.

I commented on a topic that is clearly a waste of time to comment on.  My point wasn’t intended to open a can of worms, but to point out (as with the previous post) that any moral code based on not doing harm to others should probably be applied consistently to everyone.

Either it’s immoral to harm everyone, or harm is incapable of carrying the load of an entire system of morality.    

Proportionality

 The shooting of a violent felon, with active warrants, who had the police called because of his actions, justifies riots, looting, arson, and harm to innocent people.

What appears to be the targeted execution of a Trump supporter, justifies silence from the same people.

This is too good...

...to bury among a bunch of other wisdom from black voices.  

"Speaking as a political scientist: if you can call your country's government "fascist" using your name on a public platform like Twitter or FB...it isn't"

Wilfred Reilly

 

BVMLTT

 

"The word that symbolizes the spirit and the outward form of our encounter is nonviolence, and it is doubtless that factor which made it seem appropriate to award a peace prize to one identified with struggle. Broadly speaking, nonviolence in the civil rights struggle has meant not relying on arms and weapons of struggle. It has meant noncooperation with customs and laws which are institutional aspects of a regime of discrimination and enslavement. It has meant direct participation of masses in protest, rather than reliance on indirect methods which frequently do not involve masses in action at all.

Nonviolence has also meant that my people in the agonizing struggles of recent years have taken suffering upon themselves instead of inflicting it on others. It has meant, as I said, that we are no longer afraid and cowed. But in some substantial degree it has meant that we do not want to instill fear in others or into the society of which we are a part. The movement does not seek to liberate Negroes at the expense of the humiliation and enslavement of whites. It seeks no victory over anyone. It seeks to liberate American society and to share in the self-liberation of all the people.

Violence as a way of achieving racial justice is both impractical and immoral. I am not unmindful of the fact that violence often brings about momentary results. Nations have frequently won their independence in battle. But in spite of temporary victories, violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: it merely creates new and more complicated ones. Violence is impractical because it is a descending spiral ending in destruction for all. It is immoral because it seeks to humiliate the opponent rather than win his understanding: it seeks to annihilate rather than convert. Violence is immoral because it thrives on hatred rather than love. It destroys community and makes brotherhood impossible. It leaves society in monologue rather than dialogue. Violence ends up defeating itself. It creates bitterness in the survivors and brutality in the destroyers."

Stuff that's too long to excerpt, and an interesting quote

https://www.challies.com/articles/when-solomons-fool-created-a-social-media-platform/

 https://founders.org/2020/08/27/if-silence-is-violence-jesus-is-a-sinner/

"The greatest judgement which God Himself can, in this present life, inflict upon a man is to leave him in the hands of his own boasted 'free'-will"

Augustus Toplady

I think that you can substitute "reason", "self worth" and other modern catch phrases for "free-will' and it would still be pretty accurate.

BVMLTT

https://www.outkick.com/whitlock-lebron-james-is-a-bigot/

 " Black Lives Matter is a clever Twitter hashtag designed to spread racial division. Twitter baits and rewards racial demagoguery. James is addicted to social media. His bigotry is no surprise."

I remember when Whitlock was  a new sports comumnist at the Star and a frequent morning radio sports talk guest.  

----

H/T Drew Hernandez

"A BLM supporter and resident of Kenosha reasosn that the violent acts of BLM rioters somehow make others "feel" their pain"  He says, "I condone them burning the buildings down."

 

Eye for an eye,  good or bad?

----

"Dear professing Christian, I implore you to stop engaging in 'hashtag hermenutics".  As is being demonstrated-literally- in cities across America, what on the surface may appear virtuous and principled, can in fact be, comoflauge for something pernicious and malefic."

 "The reason the church was so central to the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960's, is the church was also the axis upon which black families revolved.  That centrality must be embraced anew as the serious issues facing "black communities" today remain primarily spiritual, not social."

Darrell B Harrison

----

"Whether or not you still support the movement, it's remarkable how the goal-posts have moved for Black Lives Matter.  Rember the original "Cherno Biko on Fox" claim was that hundreds or thousands of completely innocent black men are murdered annually by cops/vigilantes."

"One of the oddest ideas in woke academia is that speech which people don't like is "violence" and should be forbidden, but destroying billions of dollars worth of property during a literal riot is "a legitimate expression of frustration" as long as no one dies."

"Speaking as a political scientist: if you can call your country's government "fascist" using your name on a public platform like Twitter or FB...it isn't"

Wilfred Reilly

----

"Before the ghetto riot of 1967 Detriot's black population had the highest rate of home ownership of any black urban population in the country, and their unemployment rate was just 3.4 percent..."

"No justice, no peace" was a slogan that found resonance.  Like so many slogans, it sounds good if you don't stop and think-and awful if you do.  Almost by definition, everybody thinks their cause is just.  Does that mean that nobody has any rules? This is called anarchy."

Thomas Sowell

----

"If our culture continues to define systemic racism by perceptions and disparities, there will always be, in their mind, a just cause for protests and riots, silly boycotts and calls for unspecific, unending "changes".

Careless reactions create careless actions."

"A perticularly annoying style of argument is extrapolation from a personal story-which itself probably isn't true- to some sweeping generalization: "Cop/black guy once punched me. Race war's a comin!"   Here, as always, the plural of "anecdote" isn't "data".

 

Samuel Sey

----

:America is getting a taste of life in the black community: roaming mobs outside your house ready to fight, harassment as you walk down the street, your property vandalized and looted, criminals trying to kick your door in.  This is what I grew up around.  This is black culture..."

Mrs. Naya Major, B.S.

Potpourri

 I saw this on something, and thought it was a good conversation starter.

Democratic Platform

You don't need your guns, because you should call the police.

De-fund the police because they make the criminals unsafe.

If you defend yourself from a criminal using lethal force, we will prosecute.

Clearly this is tongue in cheek, hyperbolic, sarcastic, or whatever terms you'd prefer.   Yet, there's some truth there. 

 I've literally heard those on the left who want to ban or significantly restrict gun ownership, or who consider self-defense an illegitimate use for a gun say things very much like the first statement.  When I've pointed out the reality that it's not the job of the police to protect us, I've never gotten a coherent answer as to why we shouldn't be able to protect ourselves.

Obviously there are a multitude of voices calling for de-funding the police.  Strangely some of those same voices have used the police of publicly funded private security to give themselves a level of protection denied their constituents.   It seems reasonable that if the second premise is implemented, that it increases the possibility that you might need to defend yourself.   

Finally, as we saw in STL, simply displaying firearms to deter people from trespassing further, generated a prosecution that was significantly out of proportion to the actions that precipitated it.   It seems safe to say that "lethal force" isn't necessary for prosecution if there are political points to be made.

-----

I keep hearing the line that goes something like "All the burning cities are on Trump's watch.", and it makes me wonder if people just grab on to these slogans without thinking.    

For anyone who knows anything about our federal system of government, it is indisputable that the executive branch of the federal government has virtually no connection with the actions of any city police force, let alone with individual officers.   These are likely the same folks who will tell you without hesitation that Trump is a tyrant, yet want to blame him for staying within his constitutional authority.    

He's offered help from the National Guard and other federal resources, with the exception of MSP those offers have been declined.  I suspect that no one in power in MN will do anything except claim credit for involving the MNANG.   Strangely enough, MSP hasn't seen the months of rioting we've seen in Portland and Seattle, and Walz and Frey were quick to call the MNANG again the other night to nip the looting in the bud.  

It's absolutely beyond me how anyone can absolve the local, county, and state governments from responsibility for these local police departments (for which they DO have varying degrees of responsibility), while trying to blame Trump who has virtually none.

----

BVMLTT

BLM supporter @AbTwo4, responding to a Twitter enemy.

"racist bitch"

"Fuck you ho"

"Hope somebody kill u n rape ya kids pussy bitch"

I can see why we should be listening to this particular black voice.  This is something I see a fair amount of on Twitter.  This "I hope someone rapes/kills your wife/children".  I guess it's either thought to be persuasive or a sign of surrender.  Stay classy.

----

"Jesus, who astounded the world by rejecting this temporal kingdom, is our savior, not rogue ambassadors.  And when He returns, you better believe that:

1. He's not going to ask His bride who they voted for in 2020.

2.  He won't be taking sides.  He's taking over."

Phillip M Holmes

Why do I suspect that progressives will find #2 problematic?

----

"Since I announced my move from LA to Texas, my inbox is full of:

Liberals telling me I'm not welcome here because I'm trans and conservatives will beat me up.

Conservatives excitedly welcoming me an encouraging me to move faster.

Interesting."

Blaire White

----

Yesterday, the hometown baseball team decided to forgo their game as a tribute to everything that's going on,  A story that got great press.  Yet I wonder:

If nobody realized that this is an extra day off in a compacted season.

What did the players do with their time?

If the fact that they only have to play a total of 14 innings of baseball over two days as opposed to 18 has anything to do with the decision, or if it's just a fortuitous coincidence.

----

I keep hearing the excuse, "Well they've got insurance." as if having insurance makes stealing and destroying the livelihood of anyone appropriate behavior.   I wonder how many people understand the realities of business insurance for small business.

1.  Insurance isn't just a magic blank check, there's no guarantee that the settlement will be large enough or come fast enough to save your business.

2.  Insurance is a way that some business owners might choose to cut in slow economic times.   So, if you've been forcefully closed down and can't afford all of your bills, it's not unreasonable to conclude that temporarily cutting back on insurance is a way to stretch your limited finances.

3.  Small business owners are rarely rich enough to survive months of being closed down, then having their business (inventory, etc) destroyed in the name of justice.

4.  If the business owner decided to burn down their business to collect the insurance, it'd be called insurance fraud.

5.  It's still stealing, it's still wrong, it's still a violation of the criminal legal code and of two of the 10 commandments.

----

I'm always amazed that people know so little of our legal system that they conclude that someone being charged with a crime or crimes automatically means that they are guilty of those crimes.   These are likely the same morons who think everyone should be charged with 1st degree murder regardless of the circumstances or the law.  As well as the ones who are going to burn more shit down when 3/4 of the fired MPLS cops get acquitted, and Chauvin gets convicted of involuntary manslaughter (or something minor).   Maybe (along with a class in practical life skills) HS should include a basic overview of how the US legal system works as well.  

 

Data, Facts, Evidence, etc...

 For example, it's possible that Breona Taylor isn't quite the innocent victim she's been portrayed as .

https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-1-e&q=Louisville+Courier+Journal+Police+Officers+Should+not+be+charged

We've seen the news of George Floyd's Fentanyl levels

https://www.fox9.com/news/court-filings-medical-examiner-thought-george-floyd-had-fatal-level-of-fentanyl-in-system

Usually one thinks of medical examiners as being experts in their field, and strangely enough so do the courts.

Obviously the version of Jacob Blake that first hit the news hasn't survived the first few days of investigation.

I posted the link elsewhere to the conclusions the P-BO justice department led by Eric Holder reached regarding Michael Brown, and the multiple litigations of the incident support the DOJ conclusion.

As we saw last night, people chose not to believe that evidence, but the narative.

The question this raises is...

If things like data, evidence, and facts, can't stop people from believing and acting on the narrative (which lacks things like data, evidence, and facts), then what's the point of ever offering or asking for data, evidence, or facts?

Silence

 It's interesting how people interpret the silence of others in ways that usually buttress they're already formed prejudices about people based on sweeping generalizations themselves based in superficial assumptions.

For example, the "Silence is violence." bullies.  The reality is that they are making assumptions based 100% on the skin color of the people they choose to bully.   The notion of making assumptions based on skin color seems wrong somehow.

Or the "If you don't specifically address topic X, in the way I think it should be addressed, then your silence means you support (or oppose) topic X."

This is usually couched in broad sweeping generalizations based on one persons assumptions.  Those could be skin color, political philosophy, or social class.   Rarely is there any actual evidence to prove the claims.

What's interesting is that when you apply the same standards to these types of people, they act as if it's unheard of to draw conclusions based on people's silence.

For example.  If someone has had multiple accounts and incidents of ham done to innocent people pointed out to them, and they continually remain silent, it might be reasonable to conclude that they support those who caused the harm.   In general, it seems reasonable to assume that if someone stays silent in condemning those that harm innocent people, that they either don't care or support the harm.

If instead, of condemning the harm done to innocent people, you offer platitudes and understanding to those doing the harm, don't be surprised if you are misinterpreted.

Wondering

 On the way home from the gym last night, I stumbled across a radio show discussing the effects that porn has on young men and how they sexually interact with young women after extensive porn consumption.   While this is actually a fascinating conversation and one that in general doesn't get as much attention as it deserves, it's not where I want to take this.

Right before I got home, the "expert" (never heard a name or qualifications), was talking about how what we see in the media affects our actions.  She talked about one study showing how what people watched changed their perceptions about hypothetical situations, she talked about the fact that advertising works, and even why the Russians chose media to try to influence our last election.

My question/thought is this.

If media influences people attitudes and actions, isn't it possible that seeing people getting away with assault, looting, arson, and general destruction, is influencing people to engage in those behaviors?  Isn't it possible that seeing people on TV walking out of stores with free stuff,  while the police look on and do nothing, enough of an attraction to push more people into doing the same?  Isn't it possible that when politicians and "community leaders" excuse or rationalize this theft as appropriate, that it influences people?   

At least with George Floyd there was some time between the incident and the riots.  With both Kenosha and last night, the response was instant rioting/looting/burning, doesn't that indicate that there are a significant number of people out there who are looking for an excuse to riot, and don't really care if it's appropriate or not?

Finally, there is a narrative out there that every bit of the rioting/looting/assault/arson is being done by "outside agitators".    Even if it's true that 100% of the damage is caused by "outside agitators", the fact is that the protests/riots are providing cover/excuses for these "outside agitators" and the BLM folks aren't really doing much to stop them.

Two Questions

 With the events of last night, I've been asking myself questions about two subjects.

1.  Is there any circumstance where it is appropriate for LEOs to shoot someone they are interacting with?

2.  Are there any instances where the BLM organization has engaged in any actions that benefit black lives who aren't dead or wounded?

Bonus question.

3.  In the cases of Both George Floyd and Jacob Blake the only reason either man was interacting with the police was because they had chosen to engage in actions that caused other blacks to call the police, given the current narrative can we glean anything from the that fact.

Getting as much information as possible

 We had an incident downtown today where an altercation turned into a killing, then when the police were trying to apprehend the armed suspect (walking through downtown), he shot himself.   The police immediately began CPR, to no avail.

As this story went out on social media, a bunch of people decided that it was time to do some damage and proceeded to attack/destroy/loot stores.   

Of course the fact that looters are getting a free pass had nothing to do with it.

FYI, the police releasing the video of the guy shooting him self in the hopes that it would help.  Apparently these folks don’t want to get facts get in the way of some good looting.  

I want to reiterate something about the release of the video and about the choice to loot anyway.

Virtually the entire interaction was recorded on multiple video cameras.  The suspect can be seen walking up to a group of people on the sidewalk carrying a gun, which scares the innocent bystanders.  They crowd flees and the police officers begin to approach the suspect, who is still carrying a gun.  We watch the suspect place the gun under his chin, and the video (thankfully not broadcast, but still available) shows him shooting himself.   Then we pick up with police officers rushing to try to save his life.

We have video if multiple black "community organizers" pleading with the looters to go home because the suspect shot himself, and we have reporters who showed the entire video to looters, and the looters chose to believe the narrative, rather than their own eyes.

BVMLTT

 “We're about to see an incredible example of spin. After 3 months of rioting that killed 30 people, wounded 900 cops, and caused $1-2B in damage, the shootings in WI last night will launch the narrative: "WHY do Trump supporters keep murdering peaceful protesters?" ”

Wilfred Reilly 

 

"In case you weren't sure, "this movement" has nothing to do with civil rights,  In fact, it is a bastardation of the Civil Rights movement of the 1960's to compare what is happening today to them.  Instead of crossing the Edmund Pettus bridge, "this movement" would tear it down."

Darrell B. Harrison

Additional reasons to vote for Joe

 I'll pick up on Dan's list before I get deleted over there.

11.  Because he's done an amazing job implementing solutions during his nearly half century as a politician.

12.  Because the Chinese wand Biden instead of Trump.

13.  Because prominent white supremacist Richard Spencer is backing Biden.

14.  Minneapolis, Portland, Seattle. Kenosha.

15.   Because Joe's big tent doesn't have room for 20 million pro-life democrats.  Unless they shut up, vote blue, and don't expect anything.

16.  Because there are still women left to sniff.

17.  Biden won't oppress protesters and rioters.  He'll do nothing, or as little as possible.

18.  Kamala Harris.  Who promised that the protests/riots will continue if Biden is elected.

19.  Biden will criticze POTUS for holding a "super spreader", while ignoring the multiple thousands who protested and who gathered the next day. 

Worth a read.

https://www.challies.com/book-reviews/how-everything-became-about-race-gender-and-identity/

 

Interesting review of what sounds like an interesting new book.  It sounds like a fairly scholarly look at where things look to be heading.

  It seems like the old concept of a political movement being a big tent might be moving toward a lot of little lagers loosely clustered around a much smaller tent.   

It might be interesting...

 ...to take a look at the cars that the rioters across the country drive.  Especially from the rear.    You have to wonder how many of them have the ubiquitous "Coexist" bumper stickers.   How many express some support for the environment.  Yes, it could be amusing.

A trend

 As I peruse (or am "assaulted" by) the social media posts of my friends, I'm noticing a trend.   Now, many of these people identify as Christians and are very public about their faith on social media.  Yet over the last few days I've seen a lot of vocal sympathy for Mr Blake, and absolutely zero acknowledgement (let alone sympathy) for the innocent victims of the increasing numbers of cities overrun with violent rioters and arsonists.    Zero mention of or sympathy for the elderly man beaten senseless before his business was destroyed, zero mention or sympathy for the innocent woman brutally attacked in MPLS, I could go on...

If y'all are going to trumpet your Christianity all over the www, while fawning over a violent armed felon trying to escape being arrested for domestic abuse and sexual assault (those things are bad, aren't they?), but silent on the innocent victim of the violent mobs they support.    I guess it's too much to ask for these folks to at least give lip service to the innocent victims of the riots they can't quite condemn.

Appearances are misleading

 A gentleman named Richard Spencer has come out and enthusiastically and publicly voiced his support for Biden in the upcoming election.  

I guess the Trump side of things isn't as welcoming to an outspoken white supremacist as everyone thinks. 

Greg Boyd

 Greg is an interesting guy.  He's a political and theological liberal, Anabaptist, Universalist, who has a much higher view of scripture than most on his "side" of things, yet can't be pinned down quite so easily.   

He's tweeted the following over that last couple of days, and the response from the tolerant left has been fascinating.

"I just listened to @RepVernonJones speech at the Republican National convention, a black Democrat from Georgia who has endorsed Trump.  Politics aside, I applaud that independent thinking and remarkable courage of this POLITICIAN!!  How common is THAT?"

The responses he got included...

"No one who endorses Trump is worth applauding."

"Unfortunately he was just spewing far right talking points. Nothing independent in his thinking"

"You're not serious right?"

"Is this sarcasm?  Would you applaud a republican in the north in 1862 for deciding to support Jefferson and the Confederacy for political courage?"

"He stood up for sin, and the destruction of the vulnerable.  So, I'd call it rebellious thinking."

"I'm very much on the verge of unfollowing you."

"I hope this is sarcastic"

"Greg...no. This ain't it chief"

"Delete your account."

And more along those lines.

Boyd's response...

"Apparently in the minds of some, I just committed the ultimate cancel-culture sin: I found something positive to say about their "enemy".  Guilty as charged! Going against your entire party, in this polarized environment reveals independent thinking and courage!  Come on!!"

I'll just post one response because this is getting too long.

"Geex, just imagining your profoundly askew worldview in the age of Stalinists & Nazis-Maoists too.  When is dictatorial&fascist murder enough for you Greg?  I've lost respect for you.  You had a good opportunity to own a mistake, but you're blowing it through a pachyderm snout."

I want to commend Greg for listening to black voices that he disagrees with and finding value in their words.  For standing up to the attacks of his "side" and to respond in a gracious, loving, and God honoring manner.  It's refreshing to see someone who can look past partisan politics and find something to admire.

I might add more of the comments and his response in the comments section here.

Justice

 This new concept of justice that seems to be defined by outcome (predetermined), rather than by process seems to be fairly unjust.

It was announced quickly after the Jacob Blake shooting that the process was a "30 day" process.  Now, I don't know why it's a "30 day" process, but as long as it's a "30 day" process in every similar case, then I don't see how it's unjust to go through the "30 day" process.  

Yet, somehow burning business who support BLM,  attacking elderly business owners before burning his business, rioting, and threats are either a form of justice or an attempt to bring about justice through coercive force.

At this point, very early in the timeline and with Mr Blake's condition still uncertain, it seems strange to jump to conclusion and to violent action.

Greg Boyd, (theologically liberal, Anabaptist, political liberal, and a genuinely nice guy) wrote this...

"I'm burdened with a heavy heart today.  I grieve another black man being unjustly shot by police.  I grieve the unjust and completely counterproductive destruction of property that this shooting brought about. & I grieve the unwillingness of Americans to listen to their opponents."

And is getting a negative response from the tolerant left for this and some other tweets recently.

I don't agree that we know with any degree of certainty that the shooting was "unjust" at this point, but I do understand and agree with his larger point.

Decisions

 “Whenever a white social justician suggests you "talk to a black person" (about "social justice"), please understand that what they really mean is, "find a black person who concurs with me so that my virtue signaling can be validated and I can feel better about my white guilt."”

“"If the skin color of the victim of perceived injustice is actually what triggers your supposed righteous indignation, you my brother or sister have a bigger problem than that perceived injustice"

Darrell Harrison 

“Good for Black docs, and all that- but results like this are ~always the result of dubiously honest "backwards margin reporting." For example, a 99.9% survival rate under Black doctors and 99.6% SR under white ones CAN technically be spun as a "300% difference in survival rates."   It's worth noting that the numbers given in this tweet are just examples of how this happens. The actual numbers from the study are almost identical - 99.71% survival for white babies with white doctors, 99.11% for Black babies w white doctors, and 99.37% or so for BB with BD.“

"Another way of putting this is that the survival rate is 99.71% for white babies with white doctors, 99.11% for Black babies w white doctors, and 99.37% or so for BB with BD."

 

 “ACTUAL significance is more important than stat. significance. A -well-done- paper just received global coverage for finding what media billed a "significant 300%" difference in survival rates for babies with white v Black doctors.

The actual gap was .26% - 99.37% to 99.11%.”"

Samuel Sey

Potpourri

 "In an argument when somebody throws a petty insult at you,  you know you've won."

Dan Go

"Feminism is in peril.  If postmodernism is correct-that the body is a social construct- the it is impossible to argue for rights based on the sheer fact of being female.   We cannot legally protect a category of people if we cannot identify that category."

Nancy Pearcey

BVMLTT

"I don't caer if sombody decides to loot a Gucci or Macy's or a Nike because that makes sure that that person eats.  That makes sure tha person has clothes.  That's reparations...take it because these businesses have insurance."

Ariel Adams

 

Here is a link to a podcast where a couple of black Christians discuss the BLM orginization.  I suspect Dan will rush right out and listen.   The name of the podcast is Just Thinking.

 https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/just-thinking-podcast/id1328733796

 

 "This is what's up.  Middle-class black citizens  are engaging BLM in Chicago and saying that the movement has to oppose BLACK crime (too) to have any logical viability.  This happens a lot off camera."

Wilfred Reilly

"Listen friends.  Just because an advocate of activist ins't doing what you're doing doesn't mean she or he isn't contributing to the common good.  The problems are many and massive.  There's enough good work to go around.  Let's support each other in doing whatever we can."

CJ Rhodes

"Telling black people not voting is a vote for Trump is telling us our votes were never our own.  In y'all mind my vote was supposed to be accounted for, it was allocated to the Dems the day I was born.  That's why no one enacts policies for us, why Biden says we're not diverse."

Erica LeShai

"The Kamala Harris pick really does get into the complexities of race.  Harris is - literally - a descendant of the nobility/planter class in India AND the Caribbean.  But a huge element of her pitch will be telling #ADOS about how she understands black oppression.  Will it work?" 

Wilfred Reilly

"Anti white racism is still RACISM and white lives, just like black lives MATTER."

CJ Pearson

"Why is it that whenever a well known liberal dies I see conservatives speaking well of the dead, but when a conservative (or their family members) die, liberals pour out their venom and hatred?  The pure wickedness and hatred on the left is almost unbelievable."

Obinauju Ekeocha

 

If this link doesn't work, then check out Kimberly Klacik's campaign ad.

 https://twitter.com/kimKBaltimore/status/1295461903268040707/video/1

 

 

USPS

 As I enjoyed another less than exemplary example of customer service at a local postal facility, I was reminded of the current conspiracy theories that seem to abound about the USPS.   But then I took a minute and I thought about some other options.  What came to me was a question.  Or multiple questions.

What if the problem with the USPS is that they're stuck with an outdated business model, infrastructure, equipment, and personnel policy.

 

For example, I needed to buy stamps today and the one employee was busy and the one machine was also busy.   My question became..."Wouldn't it make sense to consider providing multiple self service options for people who need simple things, while providing fewer  "full service" options?     

Another question that came to mind is... "Does the physical space in the building best accommodate how people interact with the USPS in 2020?"

And another..."Does the fact that the USPS is a hybrid, especially with it's civil service esque pay scale, allow them to spend money in places that promote the best customer service and efficient operation?"

In other words, I think that the simplistic "Orange Man wants to destroy the USPS on his way to establishing a dictatorship." crap going around isn't really conducive to a serious look at what is the best way to have an efficient, productive, and customer friendly postal service.  

Disclaimer.

I'm not excusing Trump if it's demonstrated that he actually is trying to manipulate the election by damaging the USPS.  Nor am I suggesting that the USPS should be eliminated.  I'm simply throwing out some questions that occurred to me as I  endured my encounter this morning.

Say their names

 Cannon Hinnant

Karla Dominguez

Owen Buell

Historically

A look back at recent history shows us that DFL candidates spend a fair amount of time campaigning in black churches.   This is usually done in a “black church” accent and without regard to church/state concerns.

The real question is whether or not we’ll see the restrictions on gatherings in churches suddenly disappear or see an exclusion for political gatherings pop up.

Of course, the other question is whether or not those events actually make any difference to a monolithic voting bloc that everyone expects to vote DFL/melanin no matter who runs.  

guess

 www.antifa.com

Education?

 I know that this doesn't represent all teachers, but it's concerning nonetheless.

Nicole Tabolt Da Silva

"Instead of putting energy into dangerous in person learning plans, districts needed to figure out how to better support LGBTQ+ students who do not feel supported or safe in their identities at home."

Matthew R. Kay

"Of course. Among the many things, I'm thinking about representation in the curriculum...many parents don't actually know the content of the books we teach, and don't see the discussions.  Now many will actually have access."

Matthew R Kay

"So, this fall, virtual class discussions will have many potential spectators - parents, siblings, etc - in the same room.  We'll never be quite sure who is overhearing the discourse.  What does this do for out equity/inclusion work?  How much have students depended on the (somewhat) secure barriers of our physical classrooms to encourage vulnerability? How many of us have installed some version of "what happens here stays here" to help this?  While conversations about race are in my wheelhouse, and remain a concern in this no walls environment - I am most intrigued by the damage that "helicopter/snowplow" parents con do in honest conversations about gender/sexuality... And while "conservative" parents are my chief concern - I know that damage can come from the left too.  If we are engaged in the messy work of destabilizing a kids racism or homophobia or transphobia - how much do we want their classmates' parents piling on?"

These are part of a Twitter conversation that has since been hidden.   One of the responses to this discussed how participation in an exercise is "stunted" because "outsiders" are "listening".  Another teacher said she plans to use the chat function in order to share information in a "parentless way", while another bluntly said that "Parents are dangerous".  

I've got a radical idea, how about we let teachers stick to teaching academic subjects, without trying to hide things from the parents of their students.  

As I said up front, I know plenty of teachers who'd be appalled at this sort of thing, but I can't help but wonder how widespread this sort of adversarial thinking is.

Dan

 Dan allows, encourages, protects, and harbors lies at his blog.

BVMLTT

 "Proud uncle tom."

Professor Hesh

"Private and home schools should not exist"

Dr Mansa Keita

"Sad when a black guy runs his mouth supporting a racist jus to get a retwet...just coz he retweeted doesn't mean he loves your kind any % more."

Bekezela Sibanda

"There will always be a blackman who betrays his race.  There were many uncle toms before you and there will be many after you.  Keep entertaining you masters"

OMAR

"There are two sins a black person must never commit: 1) Be unwoke, 2) Be politically conservative,  Be guilty of either of those and there will be &%$# to pay, not only from those within the so called "black community", but from woke white liberals as well."

Darrell B Harrison

"The problem with the idea of "systemic racism" is that, if you (1) adjust for variables OTHER than race (i.e. median age, religion) or (2) expand the analysis to groups other than U.S. whites and blacks (i.e. Asians) the "mysterious gaps" attributed to hidden racism-always vanish."

Samuel Sey

"As long as blacks vote automatically for Democrats, while teachers unions insist on getting their money's worth, it is all but inevitable that the education of black children will be sacrificed in the public schools wherever the Democrats are in control."

Thomas Sowell

"I don't find the scientific study of "race" scary at all.  If there WERE large genetic gaps between racisl groups in the USA, anything from targeted immigration to encouraging inter-racial dating to moderate/legal private sector "eugenics" could close those in three generations."

 

"Derek Chauvin may well be acquitted.  He was a BAD COP who KILLED a guy, but the media framing him as an outspoken racist, intentional murder, etc, seems to basically be false.  There's @ a 50/50 chance a jury is made aware of this at trial and doesn't convict on 2D murder."

"Slave dungeons were horrible, slave ships were horrible, slave plantations were horrible too.   Yet Planned Parenthood and abortion centers have killed more black people and in more horrific ways than slave dungeons, slave plantations, and slave ships combined."

Wilfred Reilly

Potpourri

"Unlike the African American community, with notable exceptions, the Latino community is an incredibly diverse community."

JB

James O'Keefe has filed a lawsuit against the FBI for infringing on his second amendment rights.  He's been listed on the Federal NICS background check program as a convicted felon.  Unfortunately, he's not a convicted felon.   It seems like if folx are going to push for things like background checks as a "commonsense" gun law, then making those background checks as accurate as possible should be priority #1.

The Pakistani High Court ruled that 14 year old Christian girl Maira Shabaz must stay married to the man she says abducted her.  What's interesting about this is that you'll hear certain christians put more effort into criticizing ancient Israel for "forced marriages" and "marrying slave girls", that the same folx will mention something like this.  

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/08/05/pakistani-court-sparks-outrage-ruling-14-year-old-christian/

In what sounds like the set up for a lawyer joke, we see this.  "A terribly sad story.  Two young and ideallistic lawyers get wrapped up in the BLM protest movement.  In a moment of madness they throw a Molotov Cocktail into an abandoned police car and burn it.  Now they face a minimum of 35 years in federal prison."

1.  I wonder if this was one of those "mostly peaceful" protests we hear about.

2.  I'm not sure that 30 qualifies as "young".

3.  You'd have thought that law school would have covered these sorts of crimes and the potential penalties.

4.  They're "officers of the court".

https://www.npr.org/2020/07/01/882075310/lawyers-charged-with-seven-felonies-in-molotov-cocktail-attack-out-on-bail

"As scholars who study race and social inequality, we know that diversity training suffers from chronically disappointing results.  Recent research even suggests that diversity training may cause more problems than it solves.    The authors of the article are professors at Carlton College, an institution that can charitably be referred to as progressive.

https://theconversation.com/why-diversity-training-on-campus-is-likely-to-disappoint-143644

"We humans, have a fatal tendency to try to adjust the truth to fit our desires rather than adjusting our desires to fit the truth."

Frank Turek

"Jesus turned over the tables in the temple, not in protest of commercial oppression, but in the zeal of right worship."

Dustin Benge

"Atheists routinely confuse knowing what's right with justifying what's right.  They say it's right to love.  I agree, but why is it right to  love?  The issue isn't how we know what's right, but why an authoritative standard of Rightness exists in the first place."

Frank Turek

I'd add to the last that it's not just atheists who have that problem, some christians do as well.  Further, the atheist/materialist worldview is stuck trying to establish an "authoritative standard of Rightness" based solely on some variation of evolutionary theory.

BVMLTT

https://news.gallup.com/poll/316571/black-americans-police-retain-local-presence.aspx

Listen to what the majority of black voices are saying about police.

"I can't support BLM becaues "I love black people"."

Voddie Baucham

Waiting

While I haven't watched the entirety of the body can footage recently released, I've seen enough descriptions of the footage to get a sense of what it contains.

So far the only conclusion I've reached (actually had reinforced) is that it's almost always wiser to wait until all the evidence has been released before your jump to a conclusion that you are going to act on as if it's the Truth.

I've always thought that the officers were going to be over charged due to outside pressure, not based on the evidence, and it seems (note the "seems") that this might be the case.  

While Chauvin is almost guaranteed to be convicted of something, it seems (again note the "seems") possible to likely that some or all of the other 3 will either be acquitted or found guilty of a lesser charge.

Regardless of my opinions or hunches on this, the trial is most likely going to be a circus, and the aftermath is likely to be ugly.  

It it possible to draw any conclusions from the fact that the mainstream media has been much quieter about this video than they were about the original video?  (Full disclosure, I haven't seen much news sine last night and it's possible that there has been an increase in coverage since I last checked)

First

Sunday was the first time my home church had in person worship since the panic in March.   I went and it was definitely an improvement over the other options, but still left something to be desired.

I was reminded of those who we hear say, "The Church isn't about the building..." as a rationale for not meeting in person.   Of course I agree with sentiment, as far as it goes.

The problem is that while the Church is not the building, it's also not just the individual people either.  It's the community, the Greek word is ekklesia, the physical gathering of people.

So, while I agree that it's not about the building, I'd add that a live stream or Zoom call isn't an adequate replacement for the physical gathering of people.  

I'm pretty sure that we were created to be in community with others, and that extended separation from that physical community will have negative effects.   One bit of data that seems to support this is the Barna research that is showing a significant drop in online church attendance the longer this goes on.

As for me, I guess I'll take whatever community I can get.

Extortion

https://www.courier-journal.com/story/news/local/2020/08/01/louisville-cuban-community-rally-support-la-bodeguita-de-mima/5562669002/

I guess that destroying the business, lives, and dreams of minority and immigrant small business owners isn't quite enough for BLM and their supporters, it looks like they now want to extort that immigrant small business owners.

At least they aren't going to get away with it.

At least the Minneapolis city government has a firm hand on the drastic increase in crime.  They put out some helpful hints for those who get robbed.

Two of the bizarrely named "Robbery Prevention Tips" are...

"Be prepared to give up your cell phone, purse/wallet."

"Do not argue or fight with the criminal"

Those aren't prevention tips, they're literally "help the criminals" tips.

People are confused and struggling for answers to explain this surge in crime.   All the while trying to downplay the decrease in cops on the street.

If only there was a catchy slogan that might explain why criminals feel more emboldened....Think dammit, think!  There must be something that can explain this.........

I saw something today that I’ll post more details about later, but it reminded me of a theory I saw a while ago.

In short, the theory is that the amount of “pathological” behavior is consistent across different ethnic/societal groups, but the manifestations are different.

As an extreme example, group A has 10 suicides per year, group B has 10 murders.    

I think it’s a theory that sounds like it makes sense, but I want to look at what I saw and dig deeper before I go overboard.